;|ii|;iif|iiii^ff^jm^MMU«fi<'iU. 


f- 


mii-n-t^ 


>^14(^3I  }  A4  I  If  1  f  7^114^^U.r-£fif  i^ifl 


Ktti  ^ii^iillVI*i'l 


ALASKA  FRONTiER 


THOMAS  WiLLiNG  BALCH 


i 

iiiftiii 


LIBRARY 

OF  THE 

University  of  California. 


OIF^T  OK 


Class 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 

in  2008  with  funding  from 

IVIicrosoft  Corporation 


http://www.archive.org/details/alaskafrontierOObalcrich 


THE  ALASKA  FRONTIER 


I. 


^S 


ion   i^tiiviMico        '••K^''? 


British  Admiralty  Chart,  Published  June  2Ist,  1877,  under  the  Superintendence  of 
Captain  F.  J.  Evans,  R.  N.,  Hydrographer,  and  Corrected  to  August  ist,  1901. 

MAP  No.   1. 


THE 


ALASKA  FRONTIER 


Thus  we  wish  to  retain,  and 
the  English  Companies  wish 
to  acquire. — Count  Nesselrode. 


BY 


THOMAS  WILLING   BALCH 

v\ 

A.  B.  (Harvard) 
Member  of  the  Philadelphia  Bar 


Philadelphia 

ALLEN,   LANE    AND    SCOTT 

1903 


^^4 


Copyright,  1902,  by 
THOMAS    WILLING    BALCH 


Press  of 

ALLEN,   LANE    AND    SCOTT, 

Philadelphia,  Pa. 


To  THE  Memory 

OF 

WILLIAM    H.    SEWARD 

AND 

CHARLES    SUMNER 

TO    WHOM 

The  United  States  owe    Alaska 


107610 


INTRODUCTORY   NOTE. 


This  monograph  was  prepared  with  the  object 
of  stating  briefly  but  emphatically  the  title  of  the 
United  States  to  a  continuous,  unbroken  lisiere  or 
strip  of  territory  on  the  north  west  American  con- 
tinental shore  between  Mount  Saint  Elias  and  fifty- 
four  degrees  forty  minutes  north  latitude.  In  Au- 
gust, 1898,  the  Anglo-American  Joint  High  Commis- 
sion assembled  at  Quebec,  and  soon  after  Canada 
formally  made  claim  to  a  large  slice  of  the  Terri- 
tory of  Alaska.  These  demands  put  forth  by  Can- 
ada to  the  territory  of  a  neighboring  and  friendly 
power  are  a  serious  thing,  and  would  imply  that 
the  Canadian  Government  possesses  substantial  facts 
upon  which  to  base  its  claims.  But  up  to  the  pres- 
ent time  the  Canadians  have  not  advanced  in  sup- 
port of  their  contentions  anything  but  a  nebulous 
maze  of  alleged  facts.  Their  whole  argument  is 
founded  upon  a  quibble.  If  the  Canadian  Govern- 
ment has  any  serious  and  tangible  proofs  with 
which  to  support  its  claims,  it  has  not  yet  made 
them  public. 

Nevertheless,  owing  to  the  frequent  repetition  of 
the    myth    started    in  Canada  about  1884 — that  the 


XU  INTRODUCTORY   NOTE. 

United  States  have  usurped  along  the  eastern  side 
of  the  Alaskan  lisi^re  territory  which  legally  be- 
longs to  Canada — a  large  part  of  the  Canadian 
people,  especially  in  British  Columbia  and  Ontario, 
have  gradually  come  to  believe  that  this  fiction  is 
true  and  based  upon  sound  facts.  And  within  the 
last  few  years  in  England,  likewise,  some  people 
are  beginning  to  credit  the  Canadian  claims  upon 
Alaska.  The  growth  of  this  sentiment,  however,  is 
founded  upon  a  partial  knowledge  of  the  facts  in- 
volved. This  is  due  to  the  imperfect  manner  in 
which,,  up  to  now,  this  subject  has  been  presented 
to  the  Canadian  and  the  English  peoples.  The 
public  men  and  publicists  who  have  argued  in  fa- 
vor of  the  Canadian  demands  have  curtailed  and 
omitted  important  and  vital  facts.  For  instance, 
when  they  review  the  negotiations  that  resulted  in 
the  Treaty  of  1825,  they  do  not  consider  those  ne- 
gotiations as  a  whole,  but  only  parts  of  them. 
They  do  not  rebut  the  evidence  afforded  by  the 
many  Canadian,  English,  French,  German,  Russian 
and  other  maps  which  mark  the  frontier  line  claimed 
by  the  United  States.  Why  has  no  Canadian  con- 
sidered chart  number  787  of  the  British  Admiralty, 
which  in  1901,  three  years  after  the  Quebec  Confer- 
ence assembled,  marks  the  frontier  so  as  to  give 
the  United  States  a  continuous,  unbroken  lisi^re 
above  fifty-four  degrees  forty  minutes  ? 

The  facts  and  the  evidence  upon  which  this  work 


INTRODUCTORY   NOTE.  Xlll 

is   based  were    collected   in    Alaska,   London,    Edin- 
burgh,   Paris,    Berlin,    Saint    Petersburg    and    many 
other  places.     The  authorities  are   cited   so  that  in 
case   I  have   made  any  mistakes  or  fallen  into   any 
errors,    they    may    be    pointed    out    and    corrected. 
A    paper,    La    Frontier e   Alasko-Canadienne,    which 
was    printed    in    the    Revue   de    Droit  hiter national, 
January,    1902   (Bruxelles),  and  another,  the  Alasko- 
Canadian    Frontier,    which    was    published    in    the 
journal    of  the    Franklin    Institute,    March,     1902, 
(Philadelphia),  are  in  part  incorporated  in  this  work. 
Re-prints   of    this   latter   paper    were    sent    in    the 
spring   of    1902   to   all   the    members    of   the    Fifty- 
seventh    Congress:    ten    thousand   copies  were    dis- 
tributed   throughout    the    United    States ;    and  from 
many  newspapers  I  received  vigorous  editorial  sup- 
port.    In  the  preparation  of  the  present  monograph 
I  have  received  most  courteous  aid  from  every  one 
to  whom  I  applied  at  the  Bibliotheque  Nationale  at 
Paris,  the  Sachsische  Konigliche  Offentliche  Bibliothek 
at  Dresden,  the  Library  of  Congress  at  Washington, 
the  Library  Company  of  Philadelphia  (including  the 
Ridgway  Branch,)  the  Harvard  University  Library,  the 
University  of  Pennsylvania  Library  and  the  Philadelphia 
Law  Library.     I  have  received  also  help  and  encour- 
agement in  one  way  or  another  from  C.  L.  Andrews, 
Esq.,  of  Alaska,  Colonel  William  R.   Holloway,   our 
Consul-General    at   Saint    Petersburg,  Walker    Ken- 
nedy,   Esq.,    of    Memphis,    Tenn.,    Frank    Nicholls 


XIV  INTRODUCTORY   NOTE. 

Kennin,  Esq.,  a  Barrister  at  Toronto  and  a  member 
of  the  Illinois  Bar,  A.  L.  McDonald,  Esq.,  of  San 
Francisco,  T.  C.  Mendenhall,  Esq.,  President  of  the 
Worcester  Polytechnic  Institute  in  Massachusetts, 
Monsieur  le  Juge  Nys,  Vice-President  of  the  Court 
of  Brussels,  P.  Lee  Phillips,  Esq.,  of  the  Library  of 
Congress,  John  Wallace  Riddle,  Esq.,  our  Charge 
d' Affaires  at  Saint  Petersburg,  the  Hon.  Frederick 
W.  Seward,  ex-Assistant  Secretary  of  State,  of  Mont- 
rose-on-the-Hudson,  the  Hon.  Charlemagne  Tower, 
recently  our  Ambassador  at  Saint  Petersburg  and 
now  Ambassador  at  Berlin,  O.  H.  Tittmann,  Esq., 
Chief  of  the  United  States  Coast  and  Geodetic 
Survey,  George  W.  Van  Siclen,  Esq.,  of  Cornwall, 
N.  Y. ;  and  Edwin  Swift  Balch,  Esq.,  Wharton  Barker, 
Esq.,  Colonel  Augustus  C.  Buell,  Charles  H.  Cramp, 
Esq.,  L.  Clarke  Davis,  Esq.,  George  Peirce,  Esq., 
and  Harvey  M.  Watts,  Esq.,  of  Philadelphia;  and 
other  gentlemen  at  home  and  abroad  whom  I  am 
not  at  liberty  to  name. 

On  page  46  on  the  seventh  line  from  the  bottom 
the  Russian  American  Company  is  meant. 

The  language  of  the  treaty  which  is  given  both 
in  the  original  French  and  in  the  English  transla- 
tion, is  of  itself  sufficient  to  maintain  the  American 
claim;  but  the  history  of  the  negotiations  which  re- 
sulted in  the  execution  of  that  instrument,  the  con- 
temporary facts,  and  the  maps  which  are  here  for 
the  most  part  for   the  first  time  grouped   together, 


INTRODUCTORY   NOTE.  XV 

exclude  the  possibility  of  honest  doubt  as  to  the 
validity  of  the  American  title.  It  is  not  extrava- 
gant to  say  that  any  one  who  will  take  the  trouble 
to  master  the  facts,  will  agree  that  the  pretence  that 
the  question  of  right  should  be  submitted  to  an  Inter- 
national Joint  Commission  or  to  an  International 
Arbitration  is  as  unreasonable  as  would  be  such  a 
demand  for  the  settlement  of  the  question  of  the 
ownership  of  one  of  the  original  Thirteen  States. 
This  work  was  undertaken  with  the  purpose  of 
placing  in  a  concise  form  before  the  American 
people  the  facts  involved  in  this  case.  And  I  hope 
that  every  good  American  will  take  a  real  interest 
in  not  seeing  this  question  settled  in  the  dark  and 
will  lend  a  hand  in  waking  up  the  American  people 
to  what  is  going  on.  For  the  question  is  well 
summed  up  in  the  words  of  Count  Nesselrode, 
''Thus  we  wish  to  retain,  and  the  English  com- 
panies wish  to  acquire." 

T.  W.  B. 

Philadelphia,  January  loth,   1903. 


THE   ALASKA  FRONTIER. 


THE  advance  of  the  United  States  and  of  Eng- 
land across  the  continent  of  North  America 
towards  the  Pacific  Ocean,  of  Spain  along  the  Pa- 
cific coast  towards  the  north,  and  of  Russia  across 
Siberia  to  the  east,  brought  about  in  the  first 
quarter  of  the  nineteenth  century  a  clashing  of 
interest  between  these  powers  over  the  owner- 
ship of  the  north-west  coast  of  America  and  its 
hinterland. 

The  Americans,  Lewis  and  Clark,  crossed  the  con- 
tinent and  discovered  the  Columbia  River,  and  thus 
by  right  of  discovery,  began  the  claims  of  the 
United  States  upon  the  north  west  coast.  What- 
ever rights  France  had  in  the  far  north  west 
reverted  to  the  United  States  by  the  Louisiana 
purchase  in  1803.  The  claims  of  Spain  to  the  ter- 
ritory lying  to  the  north  of  California  were  merged 
by  treaty  in  18 19  in  those  of  the  United  States. 
The  Hudson's  Bay  Company  in  the  quest  for 
furs  sent  its  trappers  and  advanced  its  trading 
posts  further  and  further  west ;  and,  as  the  author- 
ized agent  of  the  British  Crown,  it  carried  the  sov- 
ereignty of  the  English  King  across    the  continent 


2  THE    ALASKA   FRONTIER. 

nearer  and  nearer  to  the  Pacific.  Cook,  Vancou- 
ver and  other  EngHsh  seamen,  too,  sailed  along  the 
North  American  shore  washed  by  the  Pacific  Ocean. 
The  Russian  Cossacks,  first  under  an  ataman  named 
Yermak,  gradually  bore,  in  their  search  for  the 
valuable  sable  skins,  the  sway  of  the  "  Great 
White  Tsar "  across  Siberia  to  the  waters  of  the 
Pacific,  thus  proving  that  Bishop  Berkeley  was 
only  half  right  when  he  wrote — "Westward  the 
course  of  empire  holds  its  way."  Then  with  the 
exploring  expedition  commanded  by  the  Cossack, 
Deshneff,^  who  probably  sailed  through  Bering  Strait 
in    1648,^  and  with  that  led  in   1741  by  Bering,  the 

'  A.  Faustini :  Una  Questione  Artica,  Roma,  1902  :  Estratto 
della  i?zV2>/a  Italo- Americana,  Anno  I.,  Fasc.  II.,  Luglio,  1902. 

*  The  Strait  of  Anian  or  Bering  Strait  was  known  to  the  Euro- 
pean world  apparently  long  before  Deshneff's  expedition,  for 
on  a  number  of  maps  of  the  second  half  of  the  sixteenth  and  the 
first  half  of  the  seventeenth  centuries  the  strait  is  marked,  and 
Alaska  itself  is  drawn  approximately  correctly. 

Theatrum  orbis  terrarum  Ant.  Abrah.  Ortellii.  Antwerpia 
MDLXX.  (The  American  Philosophical  Society,  Philadelphia.) 
The  map  entitled  "Typus  Orbis  Terrarum  "  gives  the  Strait  of 
Anian  about  where  Bering  Strait  is.  Theatrum  Orbis  Terrarum. 
Abrahamus  Ortelius  Antverpianus,  eius  Majistatis  Geographius 
[1579]  (Kon.  Oef.  Bib.  Dresden).  In  the  map  "Tartariae  sive 
Magni  Chami  Regni  typus"  Asia  runs  up  beyond  80°  N.  lat. 
America  on  the  contrary  only  goes  to  about  55°  N.  lat.  They 
are  divided  by  the  ' '  Stretto  di  Anian. ' '  The  shape  of  both  Asia 
and  America  is  very  like  the  reality  and  the  ' '  Stretto  di  Anian ' ' 
in  its  shape  and  position,  strongly  suggests  Bering  Strait. 

Oost  ende  West- Indische  Spieghel  waer  in  beschreven  werden 
de  twee  laetste  navigaiien    ***</(?  eene  door  den  vermaerden 


EARLY    EXPLORERS.  3 

Dane,  across  the  Pacific  to  the  great  land,  the 
bolshaid  zemlia,  to  the  east,  the  Russians  began 
to  explore  and  then  to  settle  on  the  American 
continent. 

The  United  States,  England  and  Russia  continued 
to  affirm  their  sovereignty  to  greater  and  greater 
areas  of  land  in  the  north-west  part  of  the  Amer- 
ican continent.  And  Russia  even  went  so  far  as 
to  assert  her  right  to  the  absolute  dominion  over 
Bering  Sea  and  a  large  extent  of  the  northern  part 
of  the  Pacific  Ocean.  These  pretensions  to  the  ex- 
clusive sovereignty  of  a  part  of  the  high  seas  were 
made  in  an  Ukase  issued  in  1821  by  the  Em- 
peror Alexander  the  First.     In  addition  to  claiming 

Zeeheldt  /oris  van  Spilber^en  "^  "^  ^  de  andere  ghedaen  by 
Jacob  Le  Maire.  Amsterdam,  Jan  Janssz,  MDCXXI.  The 
"  Nova  Totius  Orbis  Terrarum  "  shows  the  Arctic  coast  of  Asia, 
the  highest  point  being  Novaya  Zemlia,  in  about  79°  N.  lat. 
This  is  joined  to  Asia.  The  north  point  is  marked  * '  T  Vlissin- 
gerhoot."  Between  48°  N.  lat.,  and  60°  N.  lat.  are  straits  between 
Asia  and  America  :  they  are  narrowest  in  about  50°  N.  lat. 

Gerardi  Mercatoris  et  J.  Hondii  Atlas.  Amsterdam,  Johan 
Jannson  und  Henricus  Hondius.  MDCXXXIII.  (Kon.  Oef. 
Bib.  Dresden).  In  German.  Colored  Maps.  In  the  map  "  Tar- 
taris"  the  "Anian  Fretum  "  extends  between  about  55°  to  62° 
N.  lat.  with  "Americae  Pars"  on  one  side,  and  "  Tenduc,  Reg- 
num  in  quo  Christiani  regnabant  anno  1 290 ' '  on  the  other.  The 
portion  of  America  on  the  map  distincdy  resembles  Alaska. 

A  Chronological  History  of  tJie  Voyages  into  the  Arctic 
Regions,  by  John  Barrow  (London,  John  Murray,  18 18) 
appendix,  No.  II.  Barrow  gives  the  narrative  of  the  discovery 
of  the  Strait  of  Anian  by  Captain  Lorenzo  Ferrer  Maldonado 
in  the  year  1588. 


4  THE    ALASKA   FRONTIER. 

exclusive  jurisdiction  for  Russia  in  the  waters  of 
Bering  Sea  and  a  large  part  of  the  northern  portion 
of  the  Pacific  Ocean,  he  extended  also  at  the  s^me 
time  the  territorial  claims  of  Russia  from  the  fifty- 
fifth  degree,  as  claimed  by  the  Ukase  of  1799 
issued  by  the  Emperor  Paul,  down  to  the  fifty-first 
degree  of  north  latitude.  Against  the  claims  of 
sovereignty  on  both  land  and  sea  asserted  in  the 
Ukase  of  1821  by  the  Muscovite  Empire,  both  the 
American  and  the  English  Governments  entered 
energetic  protests.  The  differences  between  the 
United  States  and  Russia  were  amicably  arranged 
by  treaty  in  1824.  On  April  5/17  of  that  year, 
Mr.  Middleton,  the  United  States  Minister  at  Saint 
Petersburg,  concluded  with  Count  Nesselrode  and 
M.  de  Poletica  a  convention  which  recognized  the 
free  navigation  of  the  Northern  Pacific  Ocean,  and 
fixed  the  latitude  of  fifty-four  degrees  forty  minutes 
north  as  the  line  that  should  divide  the  "  spheres 
of  influence  "  of  the  United  States  and  Russia  in 
North  West  America.  All  below  that  parallel, 
Russia  agreed  to  leave  to  the  United  States  to 
contest  with  Great  Britain,  and  all  above  it  the 
United  States  consented  to  leave  to  Russia  to  dis- 
pute with  England.^ 

•  On  this  point  see  the  memorandum  that  Mr.  Middleton  sub- 
mitted to  Count  Nesselrode  at  the  fourth  conference  which  pre- 
ceded the  signature  of  the  treaty.  Fur  Seal  Arbitration  :  Vol- 
ume v.,  page  268. 


,  ^ 


THE   TREATY   OF    1 825.  5 

It  was  not  until  about  a  year  later,  after  a  long 
and  exhaustive  series  of  negotiations,  that  the  Brit- 
ish and  the  Muscovite  Governments  finally  settled 
their  conflicting  territorial  claims.  And  in  those 
negotiations  the  chief  object  that  the  English  Gov- 
ernment had  in  view  was  to  obtain  from  the  Mus- 
covite Government  a  retraction  of  the  claims  of  the 
latter  to  absolute  jurisdiction  over  Bering  Sea  and 
part  of  the  Pacific.  By  a  treaty  signed  at  Saint 
Petersburg,  February  16/28,  1825,  by  Count  Nessel- 
rode  and  Monsieur  de  Poletica,  acting  for  Russia, 
and  Sir  Stratford  Canning,  in  behalf  of  Great  Brit- 
ain, the  Muscovite  Government  rescinded  its  claim 
to  sovereignty  over  a  part  of  the  high  seas  and 
the  two  governments  arranged  for  a  definite  fron- 
tier between  their  respective  North  American  pos- 
sessions. According  to  Articles  three  and  four  of 
this  treaty,  this  frontier  was  drawn  from  the  Arctic 
Ocean,  along  the  meridian  of  one  hundred  and 
forty-one  degrees  west  longitude  to  Mount  Saint 
Elias,    and    then    was    to    follow    the    crest    of   the 


As  the  Fur  Seal  Arbitration  will  often  be  cited  in  the  course 
of  this  treatise,  it  is  worth  while  to  give  here  the  full  title :  Fur 
Seal  Arbitration :  Proceedings  of  the  Tribunal  of  Arbitration 
convened  at  Paris  under  the  treaty  between  the  United  States  of 
America  and  Great  Britain^  concluded  at  Washington^  Febrtc- 
ary  2q,  i8gj,  for  the  Determination  of  questions  between  the 
two  governments  concerning  the  jurisdictional  rights  of  the 
United  States  in  the  Waters  of  Bering  Sea:  Washington, 
Government  Printing  Office  ;  1895. 


6  THE    ALASKA    FRONTIER. 

mountains  running  parallel  to  the  coast,  to  the 
head  of  the  Portland  Channel,  and  down  that 
sinuosity  to  the  ocean  in  fifty-four  degrees  forty 
minutes  north  latitude.  But  if  at  any  point  the 
crest  of  the  mountains  proved  to  be  at  a  greater 
distance  than  ten  marine  leagues  from  the  shore, 
then  the  frontier  should  run  parallel  to  the  sinu- 
osities of  the  coast  at  a  distance  of  ten  marine 
leagues  inland,  but  never  further  than  that  from 
the  shore."    (See  Map  No.  2.) 

*  Owing  to  the  importance  of  the  French  text,  which  the  British 
Government  in  its  printed  argument  in  the  Bering  Sea  Seal  Fish- 
eries Case  {Fur  Seal  Arbitration,  Volume  IV.,  page  500)  recog- 
nized as  the  official  version,  and  the  fact  that  French  is  the 
diplomatic  language  of  the  world,  which  was  probably  much 
more  the  case  in  1825  than  to-day,  the  French  version  is  given 
here  in  parallel  columns  with  the  English  translation  of  the  most 
important  articles. 

"Article  III.  "Article  III. 

"  La  ligne  de  demarcation  entre  "The  line  of  demarcation  ba- 

les possessions  des  Hautes  Parties  tween  the  possessions  of  the  High 
Contractantes  sur  la  c6te  du  conti-  Contracting  Parties  upon  the  coast 
nent  et  les  lies  de  1' Am^rique  nord-  of  the  continent  and  the  islands  of 
ouest,  sera  trac^e  ainsi  qu'il  suit :         America  to  the  northwest,  shall  be 

"A  partir  du  point  le  plus  m^ri-  drawn  in  the  manner  following: 
dional  de  Pile  dite  Prince  of  Wales  "Commencing  from  the  south- 
lequel  point  se  trouve  sous  le  par-  ernmost  point  of  the  island  called 
allele  du  54=  degr^  40  minutes  de  Prince  of  Wales  Island,  which 
latitude  nord,  et  entre  le  131*  et  le  point  lies  in  the  parallel  of  fifty- 
i33«  degr6  de  longitude  ouest  (m^-  four  degrees  forty  minutes  north 
ridien  de  Greenwich),  la  dite  ligne  latitude,  and  between  the  one  hun- 
remontera  au  nord  le  long  de  la  dred  and  thirty-first  and  the  one 
passe  dite  Portland  Channel,  jus-  hundred  and  thirty-third  degree  of 
qu'au  point  de  la  terre  ferme  oil  westlongitude  (Meridian  of  Green- 
elle  atteint  le  56*  degr^  de  latitude  wich),  the  said  line  shall  ascend  to 
nord ;  de  ce  dernier  point  la  ligne  the  north  along  the  channel  called 
de  demarcation  suivra  la  cr6te  des  Portland  Channel,  as  far  as  the 
montagnes  situ^es  paralldlement  ^      point  of  the  continent  where  it 


Prepared  in  the  Office  of  the  U.  S.  Coast  and  Geodetic  Survey.     Treasury  Department. 

United  States  and  English  Boundary  Claims. 

MAP  No.   2. 


THE   ALASKA   FRONTIER. 


For  more  than  half  a  century  the  British  Empire 


la  c6te,  jusqu'au  point  d'intersec- 
tion  du  141*  degr^  de  longitude 
ouest  (m^me  m^ridien),  et,  finale- 
ment,du  dit  point  d' intersection,  la 
m^me  ligne  m^ridienne  de  141*  de- 
gr^  formera,  dans  son  prolonge- 
ment  jusqu'll  la  Mer  Glaciale,  la 
limite  entre  les  possessions  Russes 
et  Britanniques  sur  le  continent  de 
TAm^rique  nord-ouest. 


"Article  IV. 

"  II  est  entendu,  par  rapport  h.  la 
ligne  de  demarcation  ddterminde 
dans  r  Article  precedent : 

"  i".  Que  rile  dite  Prince  of 
Wales  appartiendra  toute  entiere 
h.  la  Russie. 

"2".  Que  partout  oil  la  crSte 
des  montagnesqui  s'^tendent  dans 
une  direction  parallele  ^  la  cote 
depuis  le  56*  degrd  de  latitude 
nord  au  point  d'intersection  du 
141*  degr6  de  longitude  ouest,  se 
trouveroit  k  la  distance  de  plus  de 
10  lieues  marines  de  I'oc^an,  la 
limite  entre  les  possessions  Britan- 
niques et  la  lisi^re  de  c6te  men- 
tionn<>e  ci-dessus  comme  devant 
appartenir  h  la  Russie,  sera  form^e 
par  une  ligne  parallele  aux  sinu- 
osit^s  de  la  c6te,  et  qui  ne  poura 
jamais  en  ^tre  ^loign^e  que  de  10 
lieues  marines." 


strikes  the  fifty  sixth  degree  of 
north  latitude;  from  this  last 
mentioned  point,  the  line  of  de- 
marcation shall  follow  the  sum- 
mit of  the  mountains  situated 
parallel  to  the  coast,  as  far  as  the 
point  of  intersection  of  the  one 
hundred  and  forty-first  degree  of 
west  longitude  (of  the  same  me- 
ridian) ;  and,  finally,  from  the  said 
point  of  intersection,  the  said  me- 
ridian line  of  the  one  hundred  and 
forty-first  degree,  in  its  prolonga- 
tion as  far  as  the  Frozen  Ocean, 
shall  form  the  limit  between  the 
Russian  and  British  Possessions  on 
the  continent  of  America  to  the 
northwest. 

"Article  IV. 

"With  reference  to  the  line  of 
demarcation  laid  down  in  the  pre- 
ceding Article,  it  is  understood : 

"First.  That  the  island  called 
Prince  of  Wales  Island  shall  be- 
long wholly  to  Russia. 

"Second.  That,  wherever  the 
summit  of  the  mountains  which 
extend  in  a  direction  parallel  to 
the  coast,  from  the  fifty-sixth  de- 
gree of  north  latitude  to  the  point 
of  intersection  of  the  one  hundred 
and  forty-first  degree  of  west  long- 
itude, shall  prove  to  be  at  the  dis- 
tance of  more  than  ten  marine 
leagues  from  the  ocean,  the  limit 
between  the  British  Possessions 
and  the  line  of  coast  which  is  to 
belong  to  Russia,  as  above  men- 
tioned, shall  be  formed  by  a  line 
parallel  to  the  windings  [sinuos- 
itSs]  of  the  coast,  and  which  shall 
never  exceed  the  distance  of  ten 
marine  leagues  therefrom." 


THE    ANGLO-RUSSIAN    NEGOTIATIONS.  9 

never  contested  the  interpretation  openly  proclaimed 
by  both  the  Muscovite  and  the  United  States  Govern- 
ments that  under  Articles  three  and  four  of  the  treaty 
of  1825,  first  Russia  and  later — after  the  cession  of 
Russian  America  or  Alaska  in  1867  to  the  American 
Union — the  United  States  were  entitled  to  a  strip  of 
territory  or  lisi^re  on  the  mainland  from  the  Portland 
Channel  or  Canal  in  the  south  up  to  Mount  Saint 
Elias  in  the  north  so  as  to  cut  off  absolutely  the 
British  possessions  from  access  to  the  sea  above  the 
point  of  fifty-four  degrees  forty  minutes.  In  August, 
1898,  for  the  first  time,  the  British  Empire  formally 
claimed  at  the  Quebec  Conference  that  the  proper 
reading  of  those  two  articles  entitled  Canada  to  the 
upper  part  of  most  or  all  of  the  fiords  between  the 
Portland  Canal  and  Mount  Saint  Elias.'  (See  Map 
No.  2.) 

A  review  of  the  negotiations  during  the  years  1822, 
1823,  1824  and  1825  between  Count  Nesselrode  and 
M.  de  Poletica  in  behalf  of  Russia,  and  first  of  Sir 

Concerning  the  importance  of  French  as  the  language  of  diplo- 
macy, see : 

Regies  Internationales  et  Dipiomatie  de  la  Mer  par  Theodore 
Ortolan,  capitaine  de  Frigate,  Chevalier  de  la  1'  Legion  d'  Hon- 
neur :  Second  edition,  Paris,  1853,  Volume  I.,  page  no. 

Prhis  du  Droit  des  Gens  vtoderne  de  V  Europe  par  G.  F. 
Martens:  Paris,   1804,  Volume  II.,   §179,  page  25. 

'  The  Alaskan  Boundary  by  the  Hon.  John  W.  Foster :  The 
National  Geographic  Magazine,  November,  1899,  Washington, 
page  453. 


lO  THE    ALASKA   FRONTIER. 

Charles  Bagot  and  afterwards  of  Mr.  Stratford  Can- 
ning, later  Lord  Stratford  de  Redcliffe,  for  Great  Brit- 
ain, shows  clearly  that  the  agreement  finally  reached 
as  embodied  in  the  treaty  of  1825  was  intended  to  ex- 
clude the  British  North^Amerigajl^Jterntoryi-iromt  all 
access  to  the  sea  above  the  point  of  fifty-four  degrees 
forty  minutes.  From  the  very  inception  of  the  negotia- 
tions, the  Russians  insisted  upon  the  possession  for 
Russia  of  a  strip  or  lisiere  on  the  mainland  from  the 
Portland  Canal  up  to  Mount  Saint  Elias  expressly 
to  shut  off  England  from  access  to  the  sea  at  all 
points  north  of  the  Portland  Canal.  Sir  Charles 
Bagot,_  on  behalf  of  England,^  fought  strenuously  to 
keep  open  a  free  outlet  to  the  sea  as  far  north  above 
the  line  of  fifty-four  degrees  forty  minutes  as  possible. 
(See  map  No.  3.)  First  he  proposed  that  the  line 
of  territorial  demarcation  between  the  two  countries 
should  run  "through  Chatham  Strait  to  the  head  of 
Lynn  Canal,  thence  northwest  to  the  140th  degree  of 
longitude  west  of  Greenwich,  and  thence  along  that 
degree  of  longitude  to  the  Polar  Sea."®  To  this 
Count  Nesselrode  and  M.  jde  Poletica  replied  with 
3-  (:ovij!^.'§:^^ojet  in  which  they  proposed  that  the 
frontier  line,  beginning  at  the  southern  end  of 
Prince  of  Wales  Island,  should  ascend  the  Port- 
land Canal  up  to  the  mountains,  that  then  from 
that   point  it  should  follow  the   mountains   parallel 

*Fur  Seal  Arbitration^  Volume  IV.,  page  424. 


Prepared  in  the  Office  of  the  U.  S.  Coast  and  Geodetic  Survey.     Treasury  Department. 

Sir  C.  Bagot's  Three  Proposed  Boundaries,  1824. 
MAP  No.   3. 


12  THE   ALASKA    FRONTIER. 

to  the  sinuosities  of  the  coast  up  to  the  one  hun- 
dred and  thirty-ninth  degree  of  longitude  west  from 
Greenwich,  and  then  follow  that  degree  of  longitude 
to  the  north.' 

At  the  next  conference  Sir  Charles  Bagot  gave 
Count  Nesselrode  and  M.  de  Poletica  a  written  modi- 
fication  of  his  first  proposition.  In  this  new  pro- 
posal he  first  stated  that  the  frontier  that  they  de- 
manded would  deprive  Great  Britain  of  sovereignty 
over  all  the  anses_3ind  small  bayj^  that  Jie_bet^^ 
the  _fifty:sixth   degree    and^  fifty-fourth    degree 

forty  minutes*  of  latitude;  that  owing  to  the  prox- 
imity of  these  fiords  and  estuaries  to  the  interior 
posts  of  the  Hudson's  Bay  Company,  they  would 
be  of  essential  importance  to  the  commerce  of  that 
Company ;  while  on  the  other  hand,  the  Russian 
American  Company  had  posts  neither  on  the  main- 
land between  those  degrees  of  latitude,  nor  even  on 
the  neighboring  islands.  Sir  Charles  proposed  that 
'^  the  line  of  separation  should  pass~through  "Mthe  mid- 
dle of  the  canal  that  separates  Prince  of  Wales  Island 
and  Duke  of  York  Island  from  all  the  islands  situ- 
ated to  the  north  of  the  said  islands  until  it  [the  line] 
touches  the  mainland."  Then  advancing  in  the  same 
directionj;©  jhe^fig^st  for^,^     marine  leagues,  the  line 

''Fur  Seal  Arbitrationy  Volume  IV.,  page  427. 

®  In  the  American  edition,  Fur  Seal  Arbitration,  Volume  IV. , 
page  428  "45"'  is  printed  ;  this  is  certainly  a  typographical  error 
for  "40'." 


SIR   CHARLES    BAGOT  S    THREE    PROPOSITIONS.  1 3 

should  then  ascend  towards  the  north  and  north- 
west, at  a  distance  of  ten  marine  leagues  from  the 
shore,  following  the  sinuosities  of  the  coast  up  to 
the  one  hundred  and  fortieth  degree  of  longitude 
/     west  from  Greenwich  and  then  up  to  the  north.^ 

At  the  succeeding  conference  the  Russian  plenipo- 
tentiaries again  insisted  upon  their  original  proposal 
that  the  frontier  line  Should  ascend  the  Portland 
Canal  and  then  follow  the  mountains  bordering  the 
coast  line. 

Sir  Charles  Bagot  then  brought  forward  a  third 
boundary  line  that,  passing  up  Duke  of^jClarence 
Sound  and  th^eji  running^  from  wesi^J^^^as^ 
strait  separating  Prince  of  Wales  Island  and  Duke 
of  York  Island  to  the  north,  should  then  advance 
to  the  north  and  the  north-west  in  the  way  already 
proposed.^" 

But  again  the  Russian  diplomats  insisted  on  their 
original  proposition.  On  ■April_i7th^[824,"^_CgunJ 
Nesjelrode  addressed  to  CquntJL^j\^nj...tlxe^ussian 
AmbassadoiL.aJ.-J-Qridon,  a  long  and  exhaustive  re- 
view of^the  negotiations  with  Sir  Charles  Bagot,  and 
instruct^[_Count,X,ieyen  to^r^^  Russian  views 

upQii.-4iie.-JEjagJi§U_Cg,]binet.     In  that  communication, 

'  Fur  Seal  Arbitration,  Volume  IV. ,  page  428. 

"  Fur  Seal  Arbitration,  Volume  IV. ,  page  430. 

"  Fur  Seal  Arbitration,  Volume  IV.,  page  399.  In  the  Ameri- 
can edition  this  letter  is  dated  1823,  but  as  the  context  shows,  it 
should  be  1824. 


14  THE   ALASKA    FRONTIER. 

after  speaking  of  Russia's  declaration  at  the  begin- 
ning of  the  negotiations  that  she  would  not  insist 
upon  the  claim  to  the  territory  down  to  the  fifty- 
first  degree  put  forward  in  the  Ukase  of  1821,  and 
that  she  would  be  content  to  maintain  the  limits 
assigned  to  Russian  America  by  the  Ukase  of  1799, 
he  went  on  to  say  "that  consequently  the  line  of 
the  fifty-fifth  degree  of  north  latitude,  would  con-| 
stitute  upon  the  south  the  frontier  of  the  States  of| 
His  Imperial  Majesty,  that  upon  the  continent  and 
towards  the  east,  this  frontier  could  run  along  the  I 
mountains  that  follow  the  sinuosities  of  the  coast 
up  to  Mount  Saint  Elias,  and  that  from  that  point 
up  to  the  Arctic  Ocean  we  would  fix  the  limits  of 
the  respective  possessions  according  to  the  line  of 
the    one  hundred  and  fortieth  degree  of  longitude 

west  from  Greenwich.  ■-"- 

•—1 
"  In    order    not   to   cut   Prince   of    Wales   Island, 

which  according  to  this  arrangement  should  belong 
to  Russia,  we  proposed  to  carry  the  southern  fron- 
tier of  our  domains  to  the  fifty-fourth  degree  for- 
tieth minute  of  latitude  and  to  make  it  reach  the 
coast  of  the  continent  at  the  Portland  Canal  whose 
mouth  opening  on  the  ocean  is  at  the  height  of 
Prince  of  Wales  Island  and  whose  origin  is  in  the 
lands  between  the  fifty-fifth  degree  and  fifty-sixth 
degree  of  latitude." 

Russia,  by  limiting  her  demands  to  those  set  forth 
in  the  Ukase  of  1 799,  simply  defended  claims  against 


NESSELRODE    TO    LIEVEN,    1 824.  I5 

which,  for  over  twenty  years,  neither  England  nor 
any  other  power  had  ever  made  a  protest.  England, 
on  the  contrary,  sought  to  establish  her  right  to  ter- 
ritory which  she  had  thus  passively  recognized  as 
Russian,  and  which  lay  beyond  any  of  her  settle- 
ments. Count  Nesselrode  contrasted  the  policy  of 
the  two  states  in  the  pithy  sentence  :  "  Thus  we  wish 
to  retain,  and  the  English  Companies  wish  to  ac- 
quire." 

The  negotiators  were  thus  brought  face  to  face 
with  their  rivajjclsLims.  The  Russians  insisted,  on 
the  one  hand,  that  they  must  have  possession  of  a 
lisiere  or  strip  of  territory  on  the  mainland  in  order 
to  support  the  Russian  establishments  on  the  islands 
and  to  prevent  the  Hudson's  Bay  Company  from 
having  access  to  the  sea  and  forming  posts  and  set- 
tlements upon  the  coast  line  opposite  to  the  Russian 
Islands ;  while  Sir  Charles  Bagot  maintained,  on  the 
other  hand,  that  Great  Britain  must  have  such  part 
of  the  coast  and  inlets  north  of  fifty-four  degrees 
forty  minutes  as  would  enable  the  English  Com- 
panies and  the  settlements  back  from  the  coast  to 
have  free  access  to  the  fiords  and  estuaries  open- 
ing into  the  ocean.  ^"^ 

After  a  few  months.  Mr.  George  Canning,  the 
English  Foreign  Secretary,  instructed  Sir  Charles 
Bagot  toagree^to^the^^Portland  Canal  as  part  of  the 
frontier  line ;  but  with  the  reservation,  first,  that  the 
eastern  line  of  demarcation  should  be  so  defined  as 


1 6  THE    ALASKA   FRONTIER. 

to  guard  against  any  possibility,  owing  to  subsequent 
geographical  discoveries,  that  it  could  be  drawn  at 
a  greater  distance  from  the  coast  than  ten  marine 
y^  leagues,  and  second,  that  the  harbor  of  Novo-Arch- 
angelsk  (now  Sitka)  and  the  rivers  and  creeks  on 
the  continent  should  remain  open  forever  to  British 
commerce. 

During  the  course  of  the  new  negotiations  be- 
tween Count  Nesselrode  and  M.  de  Poletica  in 
behalf  of  Russia,  and  of  Sir  Charles  Bagot  for  Eng- 
land, the  second  of  these  two  points  was  the  main 
object  of  discussion.  Sir  Charles  was  unable  to^  con- 
clude a  treaty  with  the  Russian  diplomats,  for  the 
latter  refused  to  agree  to  open  forever  the  port  of 
Novo-Archangelsk  to  British  commerce.  Neither 
were  they  willing  to  grant  to  the  subjects  of  Eng- 
land the  right  forever  to  navigate  and  trade  along 
the  coasPor"ffie  lisiere  that  it  was  proppsed  Russia 
should  have.  Tlie' British  Ambassador,  realizing  that 
it  was  impossible  for  him  to  negotiate  a  treaty  in 
accordance  with  his  instructions,  soon  thereafter  left 
Saint  Petersburg. 

In  the  latter  part  .of .the  year  1 824,  Great  Britain 
appointed  Mr.  Stratford  Canning,  later  Lord  Strat- 
ford de  Redcliffe,  one  of  the  ablest  of  her  diplomats, 
to  continue  the  negoUatioas.J£;JCt..wnfinish.ed,betweq^^ 
Sir  Charles  Bagot,  and  Count  Nesselrode  and  M.de 
Poletica.  When  Canning  took  up  the  negotiations, 
Cr^at^BritamJhg,d  j-^ceded  from  all  her  contentions 


THE    MOTIVE    OF    ENGLAND.  1 7 

exce£t_ast:o  the  width  of  the  lisiere.  In  his  instruc- 
tions he  received  power  to  arrange  for  a  line  of 
demarcation  that  should  run  along  the  crest  of  the 
mountains,  except  where  the  mountains  were  more 
than  ten  marine  leagues  from  the  shore,  in  which 
case  the  frontier  should  follow,  at  a  distance  of  ten 
marine  leagues  inland,  the  sinuosities  of  the  shore. 
With  these  new  instructions,  Stratford  Canning  was 
able  to  conclude  a  treaty  to  which  Sir  Charles  Bagot 
could  not  have  agreed.  And  on  the  16/28  of  Feb- 
ruary  182.S,  Stratford  Canning  on  ^haIf,^f.-Grgat 
Brijtom  and  Cou^n  Nessejcodg^and  M.  de  Poletica 
for  Ru^ssia,  signed,  a_. ^treaty _d^^ 
ada  and  Russian  America. 

George  Canning,  towards  the  end  of  his  instruc- 
tions to  Stratford  Canning,  showed  what  was  the 
chief  motive  of  _£agland  in_die^..pQiding_negotia- 
tions  with  Russia.     He  wrote  :  — i 

**  It    remains    only   in    recapitulation,    to    remind/ 
you    of  the   origin  and  principles  of  this   whole  ne- 
gotiation. ^>^ 

"  It  is  not  on  our  part,  essentially  a  negotiation/ 
about  limits.  v 

"It  is  a  demand  of  the  repeal  of  an  offensive  and/ 
unjustifiable  arrogation  of  exclusive  jurisdiction  over 
an  ocean  of  jjnmeasured  extent ;  but  a  demand  qual- 
ified and  mitigated  in  its  manner,  in  order  that  itlp 
justice  may  be  acknowledged  and  satisfied  withoui: 
soreness  or  humiliation  on  the  part  of  Russia.      _ 


1 8  THE    ALASKA   FRONTIER. 

"  We  negotiate  about  territory  to  cover  the  re- 
monstrance upon  principle. 

"  But  any  attempt  to  take  undue  advantage  of 
this  voluntary  facility,  we  must  oppose."  ^^ 

Thus  the  chief  concern  of  the  English  Govern- 
ment was^Jo  obtain  from  that  of  Russia  an  official 
disclaimer  of  the  assertion  in  the  Ukase  of  182 1  that 
the  waters  of  Bering  Sea  and  parts  of  the  north- 
ern Pacific  were  exclusively  Russian  waters.  Russia 
would  not  assent  to  formally  recogfnize  the  rig^ht  of 

,   -   .  ,         III.,,,  -..^..mimir-^'"""""-"-  '  "  " 

English  ships  freely  to  navigate  those  seas,  unless 
thgjbqundaiy jgLuestion  was  also  arranged,  and  settled 
so  as  to  insure  to  Russia  an  unbroken  lisiere  from 
the  Portland  Canal  up  to  Mount  Saint  Hlias.  And 
on  this  last  point,  Englaiid,  after  a  long  and  stub- 
born resistance,  finally  yielded. 

Much  of  the  trouble  that  the  negotiators  of  the 
Anglo-Muscovite  treaty  of  1825  had  in  agreeing 
upon  the  eastern^oundaiy  of  the  lisiere  was  due 
to  a  lack  _of ^knowledge  respecting  the  mountains 
along  the  northwest  American  coast.  According  to 
Vancouver's  chart  (See  Map  No.  4),  a  Russian  map 
published  in  1802  (See  Map  No.  5),  and  other  avail- 
able information  a  mountain  range  ran  along  the 
coast  not  far  from  the  sea.^^  When  Stratford  Canning 

"  Fur  Seal  Arbitration,  Volume  IV. ,  page  448.  * 

"  We  know  from  the  correspondence  of  Sir  Charles  Bagot  that 
the  negotiators  knew  of  the  map  of  1802.  Fur  Seal  Arbitra- 
tion, Volume  IV. ,  page  409. 


Vancouver's  Chart  of  the  Northwest  Coast  of  America,  copied  from  the 

French  Edition  of  1799. 

MAP  No.   4. 


^^yJA^  P%Cont£^ 


S>^  O  atX^-^JW{Xo^^4:^rM^/9^ir- 


Map  published  IxN  1802  by  the  Russian  Quartermaster-General  Department 
AT  Saint  Petersburg,  now  in  the  Library  of  Congress. 

MAP  No.   5. 


CONTOUR   OF   THE    COAST.  21 

and  Count  Nesselrode  and  M.  de  Poletica  finally 
agreed  _upon  the  mountain__divide  _as  ^the,. frontier 
between  the  two  nations,  Canning,  acting  upon  in- 
structions from  his  cousin,  George  Canning,  who  was 
British  Secretary  of  Foreign  Affairs,  insisted  that 
shouMthe_suj]imit  of  thje^jiuuiataia^^pTiive  to  be, 
at  any  point,  more  than^en_  marine  leagues^J^Qip 
the  shore,  then  the  line  of  demarcation  should  be 
drawhparallel  to  the  sinuosities  of  the  shore  at  a, 
distance  of  ten  marine  leagues.  This  ten  league 
limit  to  the  eastward  was  inserted  on  purpose,  as 
George  Canning  stated  in  his  instructions  to  Strat- 
ford Canning  to  guard  England  against  a  possibility 
of  having  her  territory  pushed  back  to  the  eastward 
a  hundred  miles  or  more  from  the  sea  in  case  the 
crest  of  the  mountains  was  found  in  reality  to  lie  far 
back  from  the  coast  instead  of  close  to  it  as  was  then 
supposed.  _^ 

The  text  of  the  treaty  of  1825  is  the  crucial  and  / 
final  statement  of  how  the  line  of  demarcation  be 
tween  Alaska  and  the  Dominion  of  Canada  should/ 
be  found.  A  review  of  the  pour^ad^^^  between  the 
Russian  and  the  British  representatives  that  culmi- 
nated in  the  Anglo-Muscovite  treaty  of  1825  shows 
clearly  that  the  negotiators  of  that  treaty  intendeS^ 
to  include  within  the  Russian  territory  a  Rsiere  on 
the  mainland,  stretching  from  the  Portland  Channel 
or  CanaPin  the  south  up  to  Mount  Saint  Elias  in 
the  north;  and  extending  between   those  points  far 


2  2  THE    ALASKA    FRONTIER. 

enough  inlaiid  to  exclude  the  English  possessions 
absolutely  from  access  to  the  coasf  line^  afeove  liity- 
four  degrees  forty  minutes.  Within  recent  years 
some  Canadians  have  tried  to  read  into  that  agree- 
ment between  Russia  and  England  a  meaning  radi- 
cally different  from  the  interpretation  which  all  the 
world,  including  until  a  few  years  since  even  the 
Canadians  themselves,  understood.  Not  only  are 
there  within  the  text  of  the  treaty  itself  expressions 
and  provisions  that  place  beyond  question  the  fact 
that  Britain  should  not  have  an  access  to  tide  water 
on  the  northwest  coast  above  fifty-four  forty ;  but 
also  the  whole  course  of  history  from  1825  until  a 
comparatively  recent  time  shows  that  the  authori- 
ties on  the  British  side  of  the  line  thought  so  too. 
And  even  as  recently  as  August,  1901,  the  British 
Government  set  the  seal  of  its  approval  upon  that 
view  of  \yhat  the_treaty  of  1825  meant  by  repub- 
lishing Admiralty  Chart  No.  287,  upon  which  the 
frontier  is  marked  from  the  head  of  the  Portland 
Canal  and  then  up  on  the  continent  to  Mount  Saint 
Elias  so  as  to  include  all  the  sinuosities  in  their^ 
entirety  within  United  States  territory.  (See  Map 
No.   I.)  '  ' 

In  the  ten  years  succeeding  the  promulgation  of 

the    Anglo-Muscovite   treaty   of    1825,    the    Russian 

government  gave  on  several  official  maps  a  visual 

interpretation  of  the  meanjiig .  of .  Articles  - /^/'.^  and 

/our  of  the  treaty.     During  the  same  years,  too,  both 


EARLY   MAPS.  23 

the  Canadians  and   the    English  also   issued   maps 
drawn   by    their    leading   cartographers.     All   these 
maps  interpreted  the  eastern  boundary  of  the  Rus- 
sian lisiere  as  described  in  the  treaty  of  1825,  so  as' 
to   give    the    Muscovite    Empire   a    continuous,   un- 
broken strip  of  land  on  the  continent,  extending  far] 
enough  inland   so  as   to  include  all  the   sinuosities 
above  fifty-four  forty  within  Russian  territory.     A^nfi 
and   again    in    subsequent   years   both    Canada   and/ 
England  reaffirmed  upon  other  maps,  many  of  then^ 
official   publications,  the  frontier  as  it  was  depicted 
in  the  Russian  maps.  """"^ 

In  the  year  1825,  shortly  after  the  treaty  defin- 
ing the  frontier  between  Russian  and  British  North 
America  became  known,  A.  Brue.  one  of  the  lead- 
ing  French  cartogmpJiej:s».published  atParis  a  map 
entitled:  "Carte  de  I'Amerique  Septentrionale ;  Re;: 
digee  par  A.  Brue,  Geographe  du  Roi;  Atlas_IIiii- 
versel,  pi.  38."  On  this  map  Brue  drew  the  bound- 
ary of  Russian  America  on  the  continent  from  the 
top  of  the  Portland  Canal  at  the  distance  of  ten 
marine  leagues  from  tide  water  round  all  the  sin- 
uosities up  to  the  one  hundred  and  forty-first  de- 
gree of  longitude,  and  then  along  that  meridian/ 
to  the  north.  Two  years  later,  in  1827,  the  cele- 
brated-JBjussian  admiral  and  navigator, ^A.  J.  de 
Krusenstern,  published  at  ^aint^ESfer^iucg*.  "  par 
ordre  de  Sa.  Majeste  Imperiale,"  a  "  Carte  Gener- 
ale  de  I'Ocean  J^acifique,  Hemisphere  Boreal."     (See 


24  THE    ALASKA    FRONTIER. 

(       map  No.  6.)     Krusenstern  drew  on  the  mainland  the 

\      frontier  of  Russian  America  from  the  top  of  the  Port- 

j     land   Canal  round  the  sinuosities  of  the  shore  at  a 

I     distance  of  ten  marine  leagues  from  tide  water   up 

i      to  the  one  hundred  and  forty-first  degree  of  longi- 

V^tude  and  then  northward  along  that  meridian.     Along 

the  line  of  the  one  hundred  and  forty-first  degree  is 

inscribed,  "Limites  des  Possessions  Russes  et  Ang- 

laises  d'  apres  le  Traite  de  1825."     Two  years  later, 

in  i829^_there  appeared  at  Saint  Petersburg  a  map  of 

the  eastern  extremity  of  Siberia  and  the  north  west 

jcoast  of  America.     This  was  map  "No.  58"  (b) "  of 

•  the    "Atlas  Geographique  de  I'Empire  de  Russie," 

^etc,  that  was  prepared  by  Functionary. JEJjtdischeff. 

(See  map  No.  7.)     On  this  map,  Piadischeff  drew  the 

I 'Russo-British  frontier  from  Mount  Saint  Elias  down 

to  the  top  of  the  Portland  Canal  and  then  along  that 

!  sinuosity  down  to  the  sea  at  fifty-four  degrees  forty 

I  minutes,^^  thereby   shutting   off  Britain  from  access 

i 

1  to  the  sea  above  fifty-four  degrees  forty  minutes. 

"  The  reproduction  of  map  "No.  58"  (see  map  No,  7)  was 
made  from  a  copy  of  Piadischeff' s  Atlas  now  in  the  possession 
of  the  writer  that  belonged  to  Prince  Alexander  of  Hesse,  the 
brother  of  the  Empress  Alexander  the  Second  of  Russia.  The 
titles  and  nomenclature  of  the  Atlas  are  given  both  in  Russian  and 
French.  The  French  title  is:  Atlas  Geographique  de  V  Empire 
de  Russie,  du  Royaume  de  Pologne  et  du  Grand  Duchi  de  Fin- 
lande  *  *  *  par  le  Fondionnaire  de  la  6"  Classe  Piadischeff, 
employ e  au  Dipot  Topographique  militaire  dans  V  Etat- Major  de 
Sa  Majesty  Impiriale :  Commend  en  1820  et  termini  en  1827, 
revu  et  corrigi  en  18^4. 


.^ 


••^ 


•-y  Q 


'^^ 


!  5 

II 

'.•^ 

j  ^ 


.^O" 


,/»' 


^^^oCfy 


A.  Jlaha^  jUnnce' 


Imperial  Russian  Map  :  "  Dresse  par  M.  de  Krusenstern,  Contre-Amiral  *  *  * 
PUBL16  par  ordre  de  Sa  Majeste  Imperialk  Saint  P6tersbourg,  1827." 


MAP  No.   6. 


"Carte  Generale  *  *  *  de  la  c6te  N.  W.  {sic)  de  l'Am6rique,"  prepared 
AT  Saint  Petersburg  in  1829,  bv  Functionary  Piadischeff 

"AU   Dip6T   TOPOGRAPHIQUE  MILITAIRE." 


MAP  No.   7. 


EARLY    MAPS.  27 

Again  on  the  map  of  Russian  America  in  the 
Atlas_j)f  the  Russian  Empire  published  by  the 
Russian  War  Office  in  the  years  1830  to  1835,  the 
frontier  of  Alaska  is  marked  as  Krusenstern  and 
Piadischeff  had  drawn  it.^^     (See  map  No.  8.) 

The  British  Government  made  no  protest_against 
the   way  Krusenstern   and    Piadischeff  had   marked 
the  boundary.     On  the   contrary,  a  few  years  later, 
in  1 83j^_a  jnap  jv9^,_pce4?ared,  by^.^^ 
Jr.,   "  Deputy  Surveyor  General   of  the  Province  of 
Lower   Canada,"  and    published    the    same   year   at 
London  by  James   Wyld,  geographer  to   the   King, 
and  "  with  His  Majesty's  most  gracious  and  special  I 
permission    most  humbly   and    gratefully    dedicated/ 
*     *     *     to  His  Most  Excellent  Majesty  King  Will-j 
iam  IVth     *     *     *     compiled   from   the   latest  and' 
most   approved   astronomical    observations,    authori-j 
ties,  and  recent  surveys."     It  reaffirmed  the  bound-l 

Map  "  No.  60"  (a) "  of  this  atlas  is  entitled,  "  Carte  G6nerale 
de  r  Empire  de  Russie,"  etc.  This  is  a  map  of  the  whole  Russian 
Empire  in  1829,  and  in  the  left  hand  lower  corner  the  boundary 
of  the  Russian  American  lisi^re  is  given  as  on  map  "No.  58." 
Charles  Sumner  used  this  general  map  of  the  Empire,  "  No.  60,"  in 
preparing  his  speech  in  support  of  the  purchase  of  Alaska  in  1 867. 
The  copy  that  he  had  is  now  in  the  Harvard  University  Library. 

^^  Atlas  of  the  Russian  Empire.  (In  Russian.)  Map  No.  8  is 
reproduced  from  '  *  Map  No.  63 "  of  a  copy  of  this  atlas,  now 
in  the  possession  of  the  writer,  which  belonged  originally  to 
Count  Dimitry  Petrowitsch  Severin,  at  one  time  Minister  Pleni- 
potentiary of  the  Emperor  of  Russia  to  the  King  of  Bavaria. 


cSiniicxzrE 


IIJ        MMtii        nim       riiiiiri       m'jiii,!       ih.ijiiiii        Lur.n       kimiiih        mjhiI       ulihi       rrmr.       tM.i     'I 


99  O 


995 


23o 


955 


94o 


q45 


95o 


Map  of  Russian  America  published  in  the  years  1830-1835  by  the 
Russian  War  Office. 


MAP  No.   8. 


Canadian  Map  of  1831 :  "  Compiled    *    *    *    by  Joseph  Bouchette,  Jr., 
Deputy  Surveyor  General  of  the  Province  of  Lower  Canada." 


MAP  No.   9. 


30  THE    ALASKA    FRONTIER. 

ary  as  given  upon  Krusenstern's  Imperial  map. 
(See  Map  No.  9.)  Duflot  de  Mofras,  who  was  an 
attache  of  the  French  Legation  to  Mexico,  gives 
upon  his  map  of  the  western  coast  of  America) 
published  in  1844,  the  same  frontier  line  betweeii 
the  two  empires.^®  (See  Map  No.  10.)  Again  Lnl 
a  **  Narrative  of  a  Journey  Round  the  World, 
during  the  years  1841  and  1842,  by  Sir  George 
Simpson,  Governor-in-chief  of  the  Hudson's  Bay 
Company's  Territories  in  North  America"  pub- 
lished at  London  in  1847,"  a  map  in  volume  onej 
showing  the  author's  route,  gives  the  line  of  de- 
marcation between  the  Russian  and  the  English  ter- 
ritories as  it  was  laid  down  by  Krusenstern  in  his 
map  of  1827.     (See  map  No.  11.)  ^_^ 

Likewise  on  the  map  prepared  by  Captain  Teben- 
koff  of  the  Imperial  Russian  Navy,  which  was  pub- 
lished in  i8497see'Map  No.  12),  and  on  an  English 
map  to  accompany  S.  S.  Hill's  Travels  in  Siberia, 
published  at  London  in  1854  (see  Map  No.  13),  the 
frontier  of  the  Alaskan  lisiere  is  given  as  Krusen- 
stern and  Piadischeff  drew  it. 

Three  years  later,  in  1857,  an  investigation  into  the 

"  The  title  of  de  Mofras' s  map  is  :  Carte  de  la  cdte  de  V  Am'erique 
sur  l^ocian  Pacifique  septentrional  *  *  *  dressi  par  M^' 
Duflot  de  Mofras,  Attach^  d,  la  Legation  de  France  cL  Mexico 
pour  servir  cL  V  intelligence  de  son  Voyage  d'  exploration,  public 
par  ordre  du  Roi    *    *    *     Paris,  1844. 

"  London ;  Henry  Colburn,  1847  :  there  is  a  copy  in  the  British 
Museum. 


Map  of  Duflot  de  Mofras, 

'Publig  par  ordre  du  Roi,  sous  les  Auspices  de  M.  le  President  du  Conseil  des  Ministres  et 
de  M.  le  Ministre  des  Affaires  EtrangSres,  Paris,  1844." 

MAP  No.   10. 


Map  in  "  Narrative  of  a  Journey  Round  the  World," 
BY  Sir  George  Simpson,  London,  1847, 


MAP  No.   11, 


Map  prepared  by  Captain  Tebenkoff,  of  the  Imperial  Russian  Navy,  1849. 

MAP  No.   12. 


Map  of  the  Russian  Empire  to  accompany  Hill's  Travels,  1854. 

MAP  No.   13. 


IMPORTANT    MAPS. 


35 


affairs  of  the  Hudson's  Bay  Company  was  held  by 
a  special  committee  of  the  Houseof  Commons.     At 


that  investigationT^r  George  Simpson,  who  was  ex 
amined,  presented  a  map  of  the  territory  in  question, 
and,  speaking  for  the  Company,  said :  "  There  is  a 
margin  of  coast,  marked  yellow   on   the  map,   fro 
54°  40'  up  to  Cross  Sound,  which  we  have   rente 
from  the  Russian    Company."       (See  Map  No.  14.) 
This  map  shows  that  the  strip  of  land  on  the  con 
tinent   extended   far   enough   inland   to    include    all 
the   sinuosities   of  the   coast    so   as  to    exclude,   ac- 
cording  to    the    United    States   claims,    the    British 
territory  altogether  from  any  outlet  upon  salt  water 
above  fifty-four  degrees  forty  minutes.  ) 

Also  on  a  Russian  Imperial  map  published  in 
i86i_  (see  Map  No.  15),  the  Russian  Government 
again  claimed,  without  calling  forth  any  protest  from 
the  British  Government,  for  its  American  possessions 
an  eastern  frontier  identical  with  that  it  had  asserted 
soon  after  the  treaty  of  1825  upon  the  maps  of  Kru- 
senstern  and  Piadischeff. 

Jnhn^j^rn^t^niith's  inap  of  the  Provinces  of  Brit- 
ish Columbia  and  Vancouver  Island,  published  at 
London  in  1864,  gives  eloquent  testimony  of  what 
English  cartographers  thought  was  the  eastern 
boundary  of  the  Russian  lisiere  a  year  or  two  before 
the  Emperor  Alexander  the  Second  sold  Russian 
America  to  the  United  States  (See  Map  No.  16). 

By  a  number  of  overt  acts,  too,  the  British  Empire 


Map  of  the  Hudson's  Bay  Company  :  "  Ordered  by  the  House  of  Commons  to  be  printed 

31ST  July  and  iith  August,  1857."    The  Russian  Territory,  which  is  Darker  than 

THE  Canadian  in  this  Reproduction,  is  Colored  Yellow  on  the  Original  Map. 

MAP  No.   14. 


Imperial  Russian  Map,  i86i. 

MAP  No.   15. 


Arrowsmith's  Map  of  the  Provinces  of  British  Columbia  and  Vancouver  Island,  1864. 

MAP  No.   16. 


THE    DRYAD. 


39 


recognized  the  right  of  Russia  to  a  continuous  lisi^re 
on  the  continental  shore  above  fifty-four  degrees  forty 
minutes.  One  ^QLjJiese..-acts,  for  example,  was  the 
case  of  the  British  brig  Dryad. 

In  June  1834,  notwithstanding  that  by  Article  six 
of  the  treaty  of  1825  ^*  the  Muscovite  and  the  British 
Governments  had  agreed  that  British  traders  should 
have  the  right  forever  to  navigate  freely  all  rivers 
crossing  the  Russian  lisiere,  the  Russians  turned 
back,  near  the  entrance  of  the  Stikine  River,  the 
British  brig  Dryad  while  on  its  way  to  establish  a 
trading  post  in  the  interior  on  the  Stikine  River 
above  the  limit  of  Russian  territory.  Sailing  from 
Vancouver,  the  Dryad,  after  passing  through  Clar- 
ence Strait,  reached  near  the  north  end  of  Wrangell 
Island,  the  Russian  post,  called  Fort  Saint  Dionis- 
sievsky,  at  the  mouth  of  the  Stikine  River.  When 
the  Dryad  arrived  off  the  Russian  fort,  the  com- 
mander of  the  English  expedition,  Mr.  Ogden,  who 


IS  "Article  VI. 

"II  est  entendu  que  les  sujets  de 
Sa  Majesty  Britannique,  de  quel- 
que  c6t6  qu'ils  arrivent,  soit  de 
I'oc^an,  soit  de  I'int^rieur  du  con- 
tinent, jouiront  ^  perp^tuit^  du 
droit  de  navig^er  librement,  et 
sans  entrave  quelconque,  sur  tous 
les  fleuves  et  rivieres  qui,  dans 
leurs  cours  vers  la  Mer  Pacifique, 
traverseront  la  ligne  de  demarca- 
tion sur  la  lisiere  de  la  c6te  indi- 
qu6e  dans  1' Article  III.  de  la  pr^s- 
ente  Convention." 


"Article  VI. 

"It  is  understood  that  the  sub- 
jects of  His  Britannic  Majesty,  from 
whatever  quarter  they  may  arrive, 
whether  from  the  ocean,  or  from 
the  interior  of  the  continent,  shall 
forever  enjoy  the  right  of  navigat- 
ing freely,  and  without  any  hin- 
drance whatever,  all  the  rivers  and 
streams  which,  in  their  course  to- 
wards the  Pacific  Ocean,  may  cross 
the  line  of  demarkation  upon  the 
line  of  coast  described  in  article 
three  of  the  present  convention." 


40 


THE    ALASKA    FRONTIER. 


had  to  use  row  boats  to  send  on  his  expedition  to 
its  intended  destination  up  the  river,  asked  the 
Russian  commander,  Lieutenant  Larembo,  for  per- 
mission to  proceed.  But  this  the  Muscovite  officer 
refused,  basing  his  reply  on  the  eleventh  article  of 
the  treaty  of  1825.^^  Mr.  Ogden  then  proceeded 
to  Novo-Arkhangelsk,  where  he  discussed  the  mat- 
ter with  Baron  Wrangell.  But  the  latter  refused 
his  consent  to  the  proposed  settlement.  Thereupon 
the  Dryad  returned,  and  Mr.  Ogden  reported  to 
his  Company  what  had  happened.  The  Hudson's 
Bay  Company  lodged,  for  the  losses  it  had  suffered, 
a  complaint  with  the  British  Government  against  the 
Russian- American  Company,  and  claimed  twenty-one 
thousand  pounds  sterling  or  about  one  hundred  and 
thirty-five  thousand  roubles  damages. 

During  several  years  the  Muscovite  and  the  British 
Governments  exchanged  many  communications  on 
the  subject.     Finally  Lord  Palmerston  pressed  upon 


19          "Article  XL 

"  Dans  tous  les  cas  de  plaintes 
relatives  ^  I'infraction  des  Articles 
de  la  pr^sente  Convention,  les  au- 
torit^s  civiles  et  militaires  des  deux 
Hautes  Parties  Contractantes,  sans 
se  permettre  au  pr^alable  ni  voie 
de  fait,  ni  mesure  de  force,  seront 
tenues  de  faire  un  rapport  exact 
de  I'affaire  et  de  ses  circonstances 
^  leurs  Cours  respectives,  lesquel- 
les  s'engagent  ^  la  r^gler  ^  I'ami- 
able,  et  d'apr^s  les  principes  d'une 
parfaite  j  ustice . " 


"Article  XI. 

"In  every  case  of  complaint  on 
account  of  an  infraction  of  the 
articles  of  the  present  convention, 
the  civil  and  military  authorities  of 
the  high  contracting  Parties,  with- 
out previously  acting  or  taking 
any  forcible  measure,  shall  make 
an  exact  and  circumstantial  report 
of  the  matter  to  their  respective 
courts,  who  engage  to  settle  the 
same,  in  a  friendly  manner,  and 
according  to  the  principles  of 
justice." 


THE    DRYAD. 


41 


the  attention  of  the  Russian  Government  that  in  1834 
the  term  of  ten  years  granted  in  Article  seven  of 
the  treaty  of  1825^  to  EngHsh  subjects  and  ships 
freely  to  navigate  and  trade  along  the  estuaries 
of  the  Russian  lisiere  had  not  expired  when  the 
officers  of  the  Russian  American  Company  turned  | 
back  the  Dryad  in  1834.  Lord  Palmerston  also  in- 
sisted that,  as  by  the  terms  of  Article  six  of  the 
treaty  of  1825,  the  English  were  guaranteed  the 
free  navigation  of  all  the  rivers  [Jleuves)  which, 
taking  their  rise  in  British  territory,  crossed  the  Rus- 
sian domains,  the  Russian  colonial  authorities  had 
transgressed  their  powers  in  causing  the  Dryad  ex- 
pedition to  turn  back.  The  Russian  Government 
was  thus  hard  pressed  upon  this  question,  especially 
by  the  latter  argument  of  Lord  Palmerston.  Finally, 
with  the  full  consent  of  Count  Nesselrode  and  Lord 
Palmerston,  Baron  Wrangell,  on  behalf  of  the  Rus- 
sian-American Company,  and  bir  Tjeorge  Simpson, 


20        "Article  VII. 

"  II  est  aussi  entendu  que,  pen- 
dant I'espace  de  dix  ans,  h.  dater 
de  la  signature  de  cette  Conven- 
tion, les  vaisseaux  des  deux  Puis- 
sances, ou  ceux  appartenant  k 
leurs  sujets  respectifs,  pourront 
r^ciproquement  frequenter,  sans 
entravequelconque,  toutes  les  mers 
int^rieures,  les  golfes,  havres,  et 
criques  sur  la  c6te  mentionn^e 
dans  I'Article  III,  afin  d'y  faire  la 
p^che  et  le  commerce  avec  les  in- 
digenes." 


"Article  VII. 

"It  is  also  understood,  that,  for 
the  space  of  ten  years  from  the 
signature  of  the  present  conven- 
tion, the  vessels  of  the  two  Powers, 
or  those  belonging  to  their  respec- 
tive subjects,  shall  mutually  be  at 
liberty  to  frequent,  without  any 
hindrance  whatever,  all  the  inland 
seas,  the  g^ulfs,  havens,  and  creeks 
on  the  coast  mentioned  in  article 
three  for  the  purposes  of  fishing 
and  of  trading  with  the  natives." 


42  THE    ALASKA   FRONTIER. 

acting  for  the  Hudson's  Bay  Company,  met  in  Ham- 
burg in  the  earl^^^mrt^of  iSjgnFor'TITe' 'purpose  of 
arni^HjTarranging  the  incident.  *"7mer  a  few  days' 
negotiations,  these  eminent  representatives  of  their 
respective  companies  made  an  agreement  with  a  view 
to  settle  not  only  all  past  differences,  but  also  to 
eliminate  all  chances  of  future  difficulties.  For  this 
purpose,  they  agreedon  Februaix.^th,  1839,  that  for 
a  term.j)fLt£Qjy:ears  beginning,  the  1st  of  June,  1840, 
the  Russian  American  Company  should  lease  to  the 
Hudson's  Bay  CbnTpany  all  of  the  lisiere,  including 
Fort  Sgiiot;  DyonissTevslcy  exfgt^  Cape  Spen- 

cer at  Cross  Bay  and  the-Mouiit;  of  GooHTTopeHSwnlEor 
fifty-four  forty.  The  Hudson's  Bay  Company  was  to 
relinquish  all  claims  for  damages  against  the  Russian 
Company,  and  was  to  pay  as  rent  to  the  latter  two 
thousand  Columbian  sea-otter  skins.  This  agree- 
ment was  renewed  in  184Q  for  ten  years  and  in  1859 
for  two  or  three  years  more,  and^agaiixJlL_iM?^'ior 
three  years,  and  finally  was  extended  to  1867.^^ 

*'  Tikhmenief 's  Historical  Review  of  the  Development  of  the 
Russian  American  Company  and  of  its  operations  up  to  the  pres- 
ent time.  Saint  Petersburg,  1861.  (In  Russian.)  Volume  I., 
page  264  et  seq. 

Parliamentary  Papers,  18^7. 

Accounts  a — Rep.  XV. 

Report  from  the  Select  Committee  on  the  Hudson's  Bay  Com- 
pany together  with  the  proceedings  of  the  Committee,  minutes 
of  evidence.  Appendix  and  Index.  Ordered,  by  the  House  of 
Commons,  to  be  printed  31  July  and  11  August,  1857. 


LEASE    OF    THE    LISIERE.  43 

The  first  article  of  the  lease  of  the  lisiere  by  the 
Russian  American  Company  to  the  Hudson's  Bay 
Company  was  in  these  terms : 

**  Article  I.  It  is  agreed  that  the  Russian  Ameri- 
can Company,  having  the  sanction  of  the  Russian 
Government  to  that  effect,  shall  cede  or  lease  to  the 
Hudson's  Bay  Company  for  a  term  of  ten  years,  com- 
mencing from  the  first  of  June,  1840,  for  commercial 

Second  Session,  1857. 
Veneris,  8"  die  maii,   1857. 

Ordered,  That  a  Select  Committee  be  appointed  ' '  to  consider 
the  state  of  those  British  Possessions  in  North  America  which 
are  under  the  Administration  of  the  Hudson's  Bay  Company, 
or  over  which  they  possess  a  License  to  Trade,"  (page  II. )> 
pages  59.  91- 

Fur  Seal  Arbitration,  Volume  II. ;  Appendix  to  the  Case  of 
the  United  States,  Volume  I.,  1892,  page  10. 

Memorandum  relative  to  the  treaties  of  1824  and  1825. 

Memorandum  of  Baron  Wrangell. 

Memorandum  of  the  Russian  American  Company  concerning 
the  Dryad  incident. 

Report  of  the  Board  of  the  Russian  American  Company  con- 
cerning the  case  of  the  Dryad,  November  14,  1835. 

Letter  of  Count  Nesselrode  to  Count  Kankrin,  December  1 2th, 

1835. 

Letter  of  Sir  George  Simpson  to  Baron  Wrangell. 

Letter  of  Count  Nesselrode  to  Count  Kankrin,  December  9th, 
1838. 

Report  of  the  Board  of  the  Russian-American  Company,  De- 
cember 2oth,  1838. 

Text  of  Agreement  between  the  Russian  American  Company 
and  the  Hudson's  Bay  Company,  signed  at  Hamburg,  February 
6th,  1839. 

Letter  of  Baron  Wrangell  to  Sir  George  Simpson,  1839. 


44  THE    ALASKA   FRONTIER. 

purposes,  tj^coast  (exclusive  of  the  islands)  and  the 
interior  country  belonging  to  His  Majesty  the  Em- 
peror of  Russia,  situated  between  Cape  Spencer, 
forming  the  northwest  headland  of  the  entrance  of 
Cross  Sound  and  latitude  54°  40'  or  thereabouts,  say 
the  whole  mainland  coast  and  interior  country  be- 
longing to  Russia,  together  with  the  free  navigation 
and  trade  of  the  waters  of  that  coast  and  interior 
country  situated  to  the  southward  and  eastward  of  a 
supposed  line  to  be  drawn  from  the  said  Cape  Spen- 
cer to  Mount  Fairweather,  with  the  sole  and  entire 
trade  or  commerce  thereof,  and  that  the  Russian 
American  Company  shall  abandon  all  and  every 
station  and  trading  establishment  they  now  occupy 
on  that  coast,  and  in  the  interior  country  already 
described,  and  shall  not  form  any  station  or  trading 
establishment  during  the  said  term  of  ten  years,  nor 
send  their  officers,  servants,  vessels,  or  craft  of  any 
description  for  the  purposes  of  trade  into  any  of  the 
bays,  inlets,  estuaries,  rivers,  or  lakes  in  that  line  of 
coast  and  in  that  interior  country.  It  shall  neither 
have  any  trading  relations  with  the  Indians  living  on 
that  coast  or  inland,  nor  shall  receive  as  traffic,  or  in 
any  other  manner  furs,  skins,  or  any  other  products 
of  the  aforementioned  coast  and  continent.  And  in 
good  faith  and  in  a  literal  sense  we  cede  and  give 
up  to  the  Hudson's  Bay  Company  all  trading  and 
barter  on  the  aforesaid  strips  of  land  and  will  pro- 
tect the  Hudson's  Bay  Company  during  ten  years  by 


LEASE   OF   THE    LISIl^RE.  45 

every  possible  means,  in  case  any  other  Russian 
i  subject  or  foreigner  might  prevent  or  injure  the 
1  Company  in  its  trade,  inasmuch  as  if  the  coast 
jand  continent  were  not  ceded,  but  were  occupied 
|by  the  Russian-American  Company  itself.  And  that 
j  the  Russian-American  Company  will  allow  the  Hud- 
'  son's  Bay  Company  to  take  and  keep  possession  of 
the  Russian  redoubts  on  Cape  Highfield,  near  the 
estuary  of  Stikine,  and  also  to  occupy  other  points 
of  the  aforesaid  coast  and  continent,  by  establish- 
ment of  other  trading  stations,  according  to  their 
own  wish.  And  in  case  this  treaty  should  not  be 
renewed  after  the  expiration  of  a  term  of  ten  years, 
it  is  agreed,  that  the  Hudson's  Bay  Company  deliv- 
ers to  the  Russian-American  Company  the  afore- 
mentioned post  on  Cape  Highfield,  as  well  as  all 
other  posts,  which  the  Company  will  in  this  lapse  of 
time  establish  in  the  limits  of  the  aforementioned 
Russian  dominion.  In  return  for  these  concessions 
and  this  protection  and  in  consideration  of  the  com- 
mercial advantages  the  Hudson's  Bay  Company  may 
have  therefrom,  it  is  agreed  that  the  Company  will 
pay  yearly  or  deliver  to  the  Russian-American  Com- 
pany, in  form  of  a  rental,  two  thousand  otters — 
(not  counting  those  with  torn  and  damaged  skins) 
— taken  on  the  east  side  of  the  Stone  ridge,  dur- 
ing ten  years  ;  the  first  rental  payment  of  the 
2000  skins  of  otters  is  to  begin  on  June  ist  or 
before   1841,  and  is  to  be  delivered  to    the   agents 


46  THE    ALASKA    FRONTIER. 

of  the  Russian-American  Company  on  the  North- 
east coast." 

By^  articls_jaiiiih  of  this  agreement,  the  Hudson's 
Bay  Company  relinquished  all  its  claim  for  dam- 
ages against  the  Russian-American  Company  in 
these  terms : 

"The  Hudson's  Bay  Company  shall  relinquish 
their  claim  now  pending  on  the  Russian  Govern- 
ment, the  Russian  American  Company,  or  whoever 
else  it  may  concern,  for  injury  and  damage  said  to 
be  sustained  by  the  Hudson's  Bay  Company  arising 
from  the  obstruction  presented  by  the  Russian 
authorities  on  the  North-West  coast  of  America  to 
an  expedition  belonging  to  the  Hudson's  Bay  Com- 
pany at  the  entrance  of  the  river  Stakine  on  the 
North-West  coast  of  America  in  the  year  eighteen 
hundred  and  thirty-four,  outfitted  and  equipped  by 
the  Hudson's  Bay  Company  for  the  purpose  of  form- 
ing a  commercial  station  in  the  interior  British  terri- 
tory on  the  banks  of  the  said  Stakine  river." 

It  was  clearly  understood  at  the  time  that  Sir 
George  Simpson  and  Baron  Wrangell  made  the 
agreement  whereby  the  American  Company  leased 
the  lisiere  to  the  English  Company,  that  owing  to 
this  strip  or  lisiere,  the  territories  of  the  Hudson's 
Bay  Company  were  shut  off  from  access  toTidewater. 
This  is  proved  absolutely  by  the  testimony  that  Sir 
George^ Simpson  gave  himself  in  T8';7--he  was  fipr 
thirty-seyjgjgL,y,QarsGovernor  of  the  Hudson's  Bay  Com-_ 


SIR    GEORGE    SIMPSON  S    TESTIMONY.  47 

pany — before  a  "  Select  Cgp^n^^^t^^  "'^  of  theJhTmise 
of  Commons  of  the  British  Parliament  which  was  ap- 
pointed  "  to  consider  the  state  of  those  British  Pos4 
sessions  in  North  America  which  are  under  the  Ad-1 
ministration  of  the  Hudson's  Bay  Company,  or  overy 
which  they  possess  a  License  to  Trade."  The  Com- 
mittee consisted  of  nineteen  members  in  all,  among 
whom  were  Mr.  Secretary  Labouchere,  the  chairman, 
Lord  John  Russell,  Lord  Stanley,  Mr.  Edward  Ellice, 
a  native  of  Canada  and  a  Director  of  the  Hudson's 
Bay  Company,  Mr.  Gladstone,  Mr.  Roebuck  and  Sir 
John  Pakington.  Part  of  Sir  George  Simpson's  tes- 
timony was  as  follows : 

••  1026.  Besides  your  own  territory,  I  think  you 
administer  a  portion  of  the  territory  which  belongs 
to  Russia,  under  some  arrangement  with  the  Russian 
Company? — There   is    a    margin    of    coast    marked 

"  Parliamentary  Papers,  iS^y. 

Accounts  a — Rep.  XV. 

Report  from  the  Select  Committee  on  the  Hudson's  Bay  Com- 
pany together  with  the  proceedings  of  the  Committee,  minutes 
of  evidence,  Appendix  and  Index.  Ordered,  by  the  House  of 
Commons,  to  be  printed  31  July  and  11  August,  1857. 


Second  Session,  1857. 

Veneris,  8°diemaii,  1857. 

Ordered,  That  a  Select  Committee  be  appointed  ' '  to  consider 
the  state  of  those  British  Possessions  in  North  America  which 
are  under  the  Administration  of  the  Hudson's  Bay  Company,  or 
over  which  they  possess  a  License  to  Trade,"  (page  II.). 


48  THE   ALASKA   FRONTIER. 

yellow  in  the  map  from  54°  40'  up  to  Cross  Sound, 
which  we  have  rented  from  the  Russian  American 
Company  for  a  term  of  years. 

"1027.  Is  that  the  whole  of  that  strip? — The  strip 
goes  to  MounfSaint  Elias. 

"1028.  Where  does_it_begin  ? — Near  Fort  Simp- 
son, in  latitude  54°;  it  runs  up  to  Mount  Saint  Elias, 
which  is  further  north. 

"1029.  Is  it  the  whole  of  that  strip  which  is  in- 
cluded between  the  British  territory  and  the  sea  ?^^ 
We  have  only  rented  the  part  between  Fort  Simpson 
and  Cross  Sound. 

"  1030,  What  is  the  date  of  that  arrangement? — 
That  arrangement,  I  think,  was  entered  into  about 

1839. 

"  1 03 1.  W^hat  are  the  terms  upon  which  it  was 
made ;  do  you  pay  a  rent  for  that  Land  ? — The 
British  territory  runs  along  inland  from  the  coast 
about  30  miles ;  the  Russian  territory  runs  along 
the  coast;  we  have  the  right  of  navigation  through 
the  rivers  to  hunt  the  interior  country.  A  misun- 
derstanding existed  upon  that  point  in  the  first  in- 
stance ;  we  were  about  to  establish  a  post  upon  one 
of  the  rivers,  which  led  to  very  serious  difficulties 
between  the  Russian-American  Company  and  our- 
selves ;  we  had  a  long  correspondence,  and,  to  guard 
against  the  recurrence  of  these  difficulties,  it  was 
agreed  that  we  should  lease  this  margin  of  coast, 
and  pay  them  a  rent ;  the  rent,  in  the  first  instance, 


SIR    GEORGE    SIMPSON  S   TESTIMONY.  49 

in  Otters;  I  think  we  gave  2,000  otters  a  year;  it  is 
now  converted  into  money ;  we  give,  I  think,  1 500^ 
a  year." 

It  will  be  observed  from  the  foregoing  questions 
and  the  replies  of  Sir  George  Simpson,  that  the  Hud- 
son's Bay  Company  in  ^8^  recognized  bY_arUQ£S€ial 
act,  to  wit,  a  lease  of  Russian  territbry,  that  Russia 
had  a~nsiere'"on  the  continent^  fromTTounF  Saint 
Elias  almosit~3[own  to  Fort  Simpson,  and  that  owing 
to  this  strip  of  land  the  British  territory  was  pushed 
back  about  thirty  miles  "inland  from  the  coast."  In 
addition  it  will  be  noted  that  Sir  George  Simpson 
in  describing  the  positions  and  extent  of  the  land 
rented  by  his  Company  from  the  Russian  company, 
referred  to  a  map  (see  map  No.  14)  that  he  showed 
the  committee,  and  upon  which  the  lisiere  belonging 
to  Russia  was  marked  so  as  to  include  the  sinuos- 
ities of  the  coast,  the  Lynn  Canal  and  all  the  other 

^^^^-^k9yj?.-.-5f^y:ikllL^5^J?^^-f9,^  minutes,  entirely, 
and  so  cutting  off  the  British  territory  absolutely  from 
all  contact  with  tide  water. 

More  than  that,  owing  to  the  community  of  inter- 
est of  both  companies  in  the  peaceful  develop- 
ment of  the  fur  trade  brought  about  by  the  lease 
and  its  renewal,  General  Politkovsky,  a  director  of 
the  Russian  American  Com^r5CSSEesse(t., early 
in  1854 — when  it  seemed  likely  that  the  strained 
relations  between  Russia  and  England  would  re- 
sult   in     actual    war    between    them — a     note    on 


50  THE    ALASKA    FRONTIER. 

behalf  of  the  Russian  American  Company  to 
Privy  Counsellor JL.  G.  Seniavin,  oTtRe" Russian  For- 
eign Office.  In  this  communication,  he  pointed  out 
that  in  case  of  war  with  England,  the  posts  and  prop- 
erty of  the  company  in  America  would  be  liable  to 
capture  and  destruction ;  and  that,  as  thie  Hudson's 
Bay  Company  was  likewise  in  an  exposed  position  on 
the  northwest  American  coast,  it  would  be  to  the 
mutual  interest  of  the  two  companies  to  obtain 
the  consent  of  their  respective  Governments  to 
agree  to  recognize  the  ^possessions  of  both  com- 
panies along  the  northwest  American  coast  as 
neutraLj£mlaQLiiI_S§^e-JQf.ilQSjnit^^  General  Po- 
litkovsky  requested,  therefore,  for  his  company, 
authority  to  enter  into  correspondence  with  the  au- 
thorities of  the  Hu^s®n's  Bay  Company  upon  this 
subject.  Towards  the  end  of  January  the  Emperor 
Nichelas  approved  of  this  proposition.  Accordingly, 
th^~management  of  the  Russian  American  Company 
communicated  with  that  of  the  Hudson's  Bay  Com- 
pany. This  latter  company  thought  likewise  that  it\ 
was  for  its  best  interest  that  the  fur  trade  should  \ 
go  on  without  the  interruption  that  war  would  J  • 
cause.  And  the  management  of  the  Hudson's  Bay 
Company,  therefore,  urged  upon  theattention  of  the 
British  Governmenjt. the. plan. of  neutrality  proposed 
by  the  Russian  American  Company.  About  the  mi<i- 
dle  of  March,  1 854,.  th^  JBrirish^  G^^  its 

approval  to  a  territorial  neutrality  along  the  north- 


AGREEMENT   OF    NEUTRALITY,     1 854-56.  5 1 

west  American  coast,  provided  the_Russian J^overn- 
ment  reciprocate(L-  But  the  British  Government  reH^ 
served  the  right  to  stop  all  ships  on  the  high  seas,  \ 
and  to  blockade  the  coast.  After  some  further  cor- 
respondence on  the  subject  between  the  two  Com- 
panies, and  between  them  and  their  respective  Gov- 
ernments, the  neutralization  of  the  territoral  posses- 
sions of  both  companies  along  the  northwest  Amer- 
ican coast  was  satisfactorily  arranged.  And  this 
agreement  of  neutrality,  sanctioned  by  both  Govern- 
ments, was  loyally  carried  out  during  the  period  of 
the  Crimean  War.  ^ 


^'  Letter  of  General  Politkovsky  of  the  Russian  American  Com- 
pany to  Privy  Counsellor  L.  G.  Seniavin  of  th6  Russian  Foreign 
Office,  January  14,  1854. 

Letter  of  Privy  Counsellor  Seniavin  to  General  Politkovsky, 
January  25,  1854. 

Letter  of  H.  U.  Addington  of  the  British  Foreign  Office,  March 
22,  1854. 

Letter  of  Sir  A.  Colvill,  Governor  of  the  Hudson's  Bay  Com- 
pany, to  the  management  of  the  Russian  American  Company, 
March  24,  1854. 

Letter  of  Privy  Counsellor  Seniavin  to  General  Politkovsky, 
March  31st,  1854. 

Letter  of  Mr.  Hilferding  to  the  Consul  General  at  London, 
April  ist,  1854. 

Letter  of  John  Shepherd,  Deputy  Governor  of  the  Hudson's 
Bay  Company,  to  the  management  of  the  Russian  American 
Company. 

Testimony  of  Sir  George  Simpson  before  a  Select  Committee 
of  the  House  of  Commons,  1857. 

Parliamentary  Papers  y  18^7. 
Accounts  a — Rep.  XV. 

Report  from  the  Select  Committee  on  the  Hudson's  Bay  Com- 


52  THE    ALASKA   FRONTIER. 

Thus  by  an^th^^qfficial  act  the  British  govern- 
ment recognized_<3ffic|all)^  that  the  British  territory 
in  North  As]s^xica.,JiSi^.^^^off^^ove^y-{our  forty 
on  tTie  north  west  coast  from  access  to  tide  water. 
Independently  of  the  fact  that  the  lease  was  made 
in  1839  to  begin  June  ist,  1840,  and  that  it  was 
several  times  renewed,  thus  extending  the  agree- 
ment to  1867,  when  shortly  thereafter  Russia  sold 
Alaska  to  the  United  States,  this  arrangement  be- 
tween the  two  companies  is  proved  by  what  took 
place  in  the  course  of  Sir  George  Simpson's  examin- 
ation in  1857  before  a  Committee  of  the  House  of 
Commons.  Wheii^  the^^uestion  of  the  lease^inj^S^ 
by  the  Hudson's  Bay  Company  of  the  Russian  lisiere 
came  up  a  second  time  durinpf  Sir  George's  examina- 
tion,  the  following  questions  and  answers  were  asked 
and  given : 

"  1732.  Chairman.  I  think  you  made  an  arrange- 
ment with  the  Russian  Company  by  which  you  hold 

under  a  lease  a  portion  of  their  territory  ? — Tes. 

1_ 

pany  together  with  the  proceedings  of  the  Committee,  minutes  of 
evidence,  Appendix  and  Index.  Ordered,  by  the  House  of  Com- 
mons, to  be  printed  31  July  and  11  August,  1857. 


Second  Session,  1857. 
Veneris,  S^diemaii,  1857. 

Ordered,  That  a  Select  Committee  be  appointed  ' '  to  consider 
the  state  of  those  British  Possessions  in  North  America  which  are 
under  the  Administration  of  the  Hudson's  Bay  Company,  or  over 
which  they  possess  a  License  to  Trade,"  sections  1 738-1 742. 


SIR    GEORGE    SIMPSON  S   TESTIMONY. 


53 


"1733.  I  believe  that  arrangement Js  .that  yo 
that  strip  of  country  which  intervenes  between  your 
territory  and  the  sea,  and  that  you  give  them  1500^  a 
year  for  it  ? — Yes. 

"  1734.  What  were  your  objects  in  making  that 
arrangement? — ^To  prevent^  difficulties  existing  be- 
tween the  Russians  and  ourselves;  as_a^peace  offering. 

"  1735.  What  was  the  nature^of  those  difficul- 
ties?— We  were  desirous  of  passing  through  their 
territory,  which  is  inland  from  the  coast  about  30 
miles.  There  is  a  margin  of  30  miles  of  coast  be- 
longing to  the  Russians.  We  had  the  right  of  navi- 
gating the  rivers  falling  into  the  ocean,  and  of  set- 
tling the  interior  country.  Difficulties  arose  between 
us  in  regard  to  the  trade  of  the  country,  and  to 
remove  all  those  difficulties  we  agreed  to  give  them 
an  annual  allowance.  I  think,  in  the  first  instance, 
2000  otter  skins,  and  afterwards  1500;!^  a  year. 


'*  1738.  During  the  late  war  [the  Crimean]  which 
existed  between  Russia  and  England,  I  believe  that 
some  arrangement  was  made  between  you  and  the 
Russians  by  which  you  agreed  not  to  molest  one 
another  ? — Yes,  such  an  arrangement  was  made. 

"1739.  By  the  two  companies? — Yes;  and  Gov- 
ernment confirmed  the  arrangement. 

"1740.  You  agreed  that  on  neither  side  should 
there  be  any  molestation  or  interference  with  the 
trade  of  the  different  parties  ? — Yes. 


54  THE    ALASKA    FRONTIER. 

"1 741.  And  I  believe  that  that  was  strictly  ob- 
served during  the  whole  war? — Yes. 

"1742.  Mr.  Bell.  Which  Government  confirmed 
the  arrangement,  the  Russian  or  the  English,  or 
both  ? — Both  Governments." 

This  additional  information  shows  that  the  Eng- 
lish Company  rented  the  lisiere  from  the  Russian 
Company,  because  the  lisiere  shut  off  the  English 
Company  from  access  to  the  fiords  of  the  sea  that 
advanced  into  the  continent.  And  further,  these 
questions  and  replies  prove  that  the  English  Govern- 
ment— by  confirming  the  agreement  of  the  English 
Company  with  the  Russian  not  to  interfere  with 
each  other  while  their  respective  Governments  were 
busy  waging  war  in  other  parts  of  the  world  during 
the  years  1854,  1855  and  1856 — recognized  and 
sanctioned  the  claim  of  Russia  that  she  had  an 
unbroken  lisiere  on  the  mainland  extending  far 
enough  inland  so  as  to  envelop  within  her  own  do- 
mains the  Lynn  Canal  and  all  the  fiords  that  pene- 
trate into  the   continent  above  the    Portland  Canal. 

Sir  G^orge_Simpson  exhibited  in  1857  before  the 
Committee  a  map,  which  was  subsequently  printed 
by  order  of  the  House  of  Commons.  (See  map 
No.  14.)  He  referred  to  the  agreement  between  the 
two  companies  and  showed  on  this  map  the  areajof 
Xh^Teased  strip,  and  the  inland  boundary  of  the  lisiere 
as  marked  on  that  map  agrees  with  the  boundarv 
claimed  by  the  United  States.    It  was  in  order  to  gain  | 


\ 


'•  FIFTY-FOUR    FORTY   OR    FIGHT."  55 

access  to  the  sea  and  to  avoid  the  possibility  of  any 
clash  between  the  agents  of  the  two  companies  re- 
sulting from  the  long  Alaskan  pan  handle  that  cut  off 
the  Canadians  from  the  sea  above  fift>'-four  forty,  that 
the  Hudson's   Bay   Company  was  willing  to  pay  a 

\  rental :  it  was^as  Sin  George Simpson  said,  paid  as 

a  "  peace  offering."  Forty-one  years  later  Canada,  as 
tCe  successor  of  the  Hudson's  Bay  Company,  pre- 
sented to_the.JJnited^  States  at  the  meeting  of  the 
Anglo-American  Joint  High  Commissi  at  Quebec 
a  territorial  claim  radically  at  variance  with  the 
boundary  of  Alaska  as  publicly  exhibited  to  the 
world  in  1857,  by  the  Hudson's  Bay  Company 
through  its  Governor-General. 

But  previous  to  the  Crimean  War,  back  to  the 
time  of  the  controversy  over  the  northwest  boundary 
between  the  United  States  and  Great  Britain,  during 
Polk's  administration,  when  the  cry  of  **  Fifty-four 
forty  or  fight"  so  famous  in  our  history  was  raised, 
Russia  offered  us  her  American  ^ossession^^rovided 
that  we  should  rnainjtairiQur.. claims  up  to  fift)^-four 
degrees  forty  minutes  north,  the  most  southern  ppint 
of  her  territory.^     If  We  had  accepted  her  offer  and 

^Papers  relating  to  Foreign  Affairs,  accompanying  the  annual 
message  of  the  President  to  the  second  session  of  the  Fortieth  Con- 
gress^ 1867,  Part  I.,  Washington:  Government  Printing  Office, 
1886,  page  390. 

Seward  at  Washington  as  Senator  and  Secretary  of  State,  by 
Frederick  W.  Seward,  Volume  III.,  pages  346-347. 

Fur  Seal  Arbitration:  Volume  IV.,  pages  276-277. 


56  THE    ALASKA    FRONTIER. 

persisted  in  our  claims,  the  North  American  British 
possessions  would  have  been  practically  shut  out 
"Irom  access  to  the  Pacific  Ocean.  But  President 
Polk's  administration,  after  the  death  of  Andrew 
Jackson,^  backed  down  in  the  north  to  seek  an  ex- 
tension in  warmer  lands  in  the  south.  England  thus 
gained  a  large  outlet  on  the  Pacific  coast. 

Time  wore  on.  In  1859  the  subject  of  a  transfer 
of  Russian  America  to  the  United  States  was  re- 
vived. At  that  time^^Senator  Gwin  of  California,  in 
behalf  of  the  Buchanan  administration,  had  some  in- 
terviews with  the  Russian   minister  at  Washington 

"Governor  William  Allen  of  Ohio  or  "  Old  Bill"  Allen  as  he 
was  known  in  his  State,  told  many  years  since  Colonel  Augustus 
C.  Buell,  the  author  of  a  "  Life  of  Paul  Jones,"  the  following  in- 
cident about  the  territory  west  of  the  Rockies.  He  said  that  once 
when  Andrew  Jackson  was  President,  the  British  Minister,  in  an 
interview  with  Secretary  Van  Buren,  informally  referred  to  the 
question  of  arranging  the  northwest  boundary  west  of  the  Rock- 
ies along  the  forty-ninth  degree  ;  Van  Buren  at  once  reported  the 
matter  to  General  Jackson,  who  replied  that  he  had  fought  for 
the  southern  end  of  the  Louisiana  Purchase,  and  that  though  he 
was  then  pretty  old,  yet  there  was  still  enough  blood  in  his  veins 
to  enable  him  to  fight  if  necessary  for  the  northern  end.  The 
British  Government  did  not  reopen  that  question  until  Jackson 
was  dead.  Colonel  Buell,  in  a  letter  to  the  writer,  says  that 
' '  Old  Bill  Allen,  then  a  Senator  from  Ohio,  was  the  author  of 
'  Fifty  four  forty  or  fight '  !  And  the  speech  in  which  he  uttered 
the  phrase  so  endeared  him  to  Jackson  that  the  old  man  always 
afterwards,  so  long  as  he  lived,  used  to  call  him  '  My  son, 
William.'  "  Concerning  Polk's  character  see  Martin  Van  Bu- 
ren, by  Edward  M.  Shepard  in  the  American  Statesmen  series. 
New  York,  1899,  page  412. 


PROPOSED    SALE    OF    RUSSIAN    AMERICA,     1 859.  57 

1  in  reference  to  buying  Alaska.^  In  these  conversa- 
tions, "  while_^£rof(gssijog-.la^ speak., for Jthe  President 
unofficially,  he  [Senator  Gwin]  represented  '  that  / 
Russia  was  too  far  off  to  make  the  most  of  these/ 
possessions ;  and  that  as  we  are  near,  we  can  derive^ 
more  from  them.'  In  reply  to  an  inquiry  of  the  Rus- 
sian Minister,  Mr.  Gwin  said  that  J  the  United  States 
could  go  as  high  as  5,000,000  dollars  for  the  pur- 
chase,'  on  which  the  former  made  no  comment.  Mr. 
Appleton,  on  another  occasion,  said  to  the  Minister 
that  *  the  President  thought  that  the  acquisition 
would  be  very  profitable  to  the  States  on  the  Pacific  ; 
thatjiejvas  £eadjj^o^  foUowjXiiPrJillL^ds^ 
in  advance  if  Rus^ijt^was^ea^jLjBL,  cede ;  that  if 
she  were,  he  would  confer  with  his  Cabinet,  and 
influential  members  of  Congress.  All  this  was  un- 
official ;  but  it  was  promptly  communicated  to  the 
Russian  Government,  who  seem  to  have  taken  it  into 
careful  consideration.  Prince  Gortschakow,  in  a  dis- 
patch which  reached  here  [Washington]  early  in  the 
summer  of  i860,  said  that  the  '  offer  was  no t_what 
mighty  hsYG  been_  expected ;  but  that  it  merited  ma- 
ture reflection  ;  that  the  Minister  of  Finance  was 
about  to  inquire  into  the  conditicm  ^of^these^pp,§^s- 
sions.'  The  Prince  added  for  himself  that  *  he  was 
by  no  means  satisfied  personally  that  it  would  be 
for  the  interests  of  Russia  politically  to  alienate  these 
possessions ;  that  the  only  consideration  which  could 

^ Fur  Seal  Arbitration  :  Volume  IV.,  1895,  page  277. 


58  THE    ALASKA    FRONTIER. 

make  the  scales  incline  that  way  would  be  the  pros- 
pect of  great  financial  advantages  ;  but  that  the  sum 
of  5,000,000  dollars  does  not  seem  in  any  way  to 
represent  the  real  value  of  those  possessions,'  and 
he  concluded  by  asking  the  Minister  to  tell  Mr. 
Appleton.ja.Pjd^jSenator  Gwin  that  the  sum  offered 
was  not  considered  *an  eguitable_ equivalent' ''^ 

Soon  afterwards,  the  momentous^jxsiiiejaJda]u*lec- 
tion  of  i86q  and  the  beginning  pX„ the  QviLW 
1 86 1,  brushed  aside  the  subject  of  the  purchase  of 
Alasl^a*^  During  the  four  years  that  the  war  raged, 
Russia  was  the  one_  great  nation  that  consistently 
from  the  beginning  of  that  struggle  favored  the 
Union  cause.^  While  other  great  f  owers  were"ife1ther 
luke-warm  towards  or  even  hostile  to  the  mainte- 
nance of  the  integrity  of  the  United  States,  the  Mus- 
covite Empire  was  the  open  friend  of  the  Union. 
Soon  after  the  commencement  of  hostilities,  Prince 
Gortschakoff;  on  July  i  Qth,   1861,^  addressed  a  note 

^"^ Fur  Seal  Arbitration :  Volume  IV.,  page  278. 

^  Fur  Seal  Arbitration  :  Volume  IV.,  page  278. 

^  Seward  at  Washington^  as  Senator  and  Secretary  of  State, 
by  Frederick  W.  Seward:  New  York,  1891,  Volume  III.,  pages 
40,  49. 

"^  Prince  Gortschakoff's  letter  of  July  loth,  1861,  to  M.  de 
Stoeckl,  Senate  Ex.  Doc.  No.  i,  jyth  Congress,  2nd  Session  : 
Washington,  Government  Printing  Office,  1861,  page  308.  Mr. 
Cameron  to  Mr.  Seward,  St.  Petersburg,  June  26th,  1862. 
House  Ex.  Doc.  No.  i,  jyth  Congress,  jd  Session,  pages  447- 
448.     Mr.  Taylor  to  Mr.  Seward,  October  29th,  1862  ;  ib.  page 


RUSSIA    AND    THE    UNITED    STATES,    1 86 1 -6 5.  59 

to  M.  de  Stoeckl,  the  Russian^.Mimster  at  Washing- 
ton, in  which  he  instructed  hinx. to.  assure  Secretary 
SewarST  of  the  friendly,  feelings  that  the  Russian 
Government  held  for  that  of  the  United  States.  In 
various  other  ways  the  Russian  Government  evinced 
its  sympathy  with  that  of  the  United  States.  So 
much  so,  in  fact,  that  L.  Q.  C.  Lamar,  whom  Presi- 
dent Davis  intrusted  in  1862  with  the  mission  of 
representing  the  Confederate  States  at  the  Court  of 
Saint  Petersburg,  never  found  it  worth  while  to  pro- 
ceed   beyond    Paris    on    his    mission.^^     While    the 

463.  Prince  Gortschakoff  to  Mr.  Bayard  Taylor,  Charg6  d' Af- 
faires, ib.  page  464  :  "  Russia  has  declared  her  position  and  will 
maintain  it.  There  will  be  proposals  for  intervention.  We  be- 
lieve that  intervention  could  do  no  good  at  present.  Proposals 
will  be  made  to  Russia  to  join  in  some  plan  of  interference.  She 
will  refuse  any  intervention  of  the  kind.  Russia  will  occupy 
the  same  ground  as  at  the  beginning  of  the  struggle.  You  may 
rely  upon  it,  she  will  not  change.  ^^ 

'^The  letters  that  passed  between  Judah  P.  Benjamin,  the 
Secretary  of  State  of  the  Confederacy,  and  Lamar,  concerning 
the  latter' s  mission,  are  in  the  Diplomatic  Correspondence  of  the 
Confederacy,  in  the  keeping  of  Judge  Lewis  Jordan  at  the  Treas- 
ury Department  at  Washington.  Benjamin  in  a  letter  dated  at 
Richmond,  November  19,  1862,  says  that  because  of  the  note 
that  the  Cabinet  of  Saint  Petersburg  addressed  to  that  of  Wash- 
ington, early  in  the  war,  to  which  an  extensive  publicity  was 
given,  the  Confederate  Government  did  not  think  it  worth  while 
to  send  sooner  a  representative  to  Russia. 

Lamar  in  a  letter  to  Benjamin  dated  at  London,  March  20, 
1863,  notes  the  fear  of  the  British  Government  in  September 
1862  to  openly  interfere  in  the  war.     Lamar  writes  : 

' '  The  events  of  a  day  may  reverse  it  [the  policy  of  the  Gov- 
ernment] entirely,  as  the  following  facts  will  illustrate  : 


6o  THE    ALASKA    FRONTIER. 

English  Government  permitted — in  spite  of  the  pro- 
tests of  the  American  Minister  to  England,  Charles 
Francis  Adams — the  building  of  the  Alabama  and 
other  Confederate  cruisers  in  English  ports  and 
allowed  them  to  sail,  armed  with  English  guns  and 

[On  Lamar's  letter,  the  following  paragraph  has  been  copied 
by  the  Confederates  on  to  a  blank  space  where  Lamar  evidently 
intended  that  a  translation  of  his  narrative  in  cypher  should  be 
placed.] 
"Name given  "  In  Cypher  in  the  original  My  informant  states  the  declara- 
aiso  "nq<jes-  ^-jq^j  Qf  ^  leading  member  of  the  Government  party  (the  intimate 
confidential  friend  of  L^-  P.  [Palmerston]  )  that  the  Confederacy 
would  be  recognized  in  a  few  days  &  that  he  would  be  appointed 
minister  to  the  C.  S.  A.  All  the  names  given  in  the  original. 
This  took  place  in  September  last  [1862],  Only  a  few  days 
after,  the  same  distinguished  personage  said  to  my  informant, 
'the  game  is  up.     We  have  had  to  take  another  tack.'  " 

Evidence  from  the  Confederate  side,  and,  therefore,  of  much 
importance,  showing  how  the  Emperor  Alexander  the  Second, 
threw  his  influence  into  the  international  scales  in  favor  of  the 
United  States  Government  during  the  Civil  War,  is  found  in  the 
following  memorandum  of  an  interview  between  Justice  Lamar 
and  Louis  Napoleon,  It  was  written  September  12th,  1901,  by 
Colonel  Augusus  C.  Buell,  and  addressed  to  Charles  H.  Cramp, 
Esq.  It  proves,  as  the  Diplomatic  Correspondence  of  the  Con- 
federacy also  shows,  that  the  late  Justice  Lamar,  who  was  ap- 
pointed in  1862  to  represent  the  Confederate  States  at  the  Court 
of  Saint  Petersburg,  never  found  it  worth  while  to  proceed  fur- 
ther on  his  mission  than  Paris.     Colonel  Buell  says  : 

"The  late  Lucius  Q.  C.  Lamar,  shortly  after  he  had  been  ap- 
pointed an  Associate  Justice  of  the  Supreme  Court  by  President 
Cleveland,  related  to  me  at  his  apartments  in  Washington  the 
following : 

"Early  in  1862  when  the  military  fortunes  of  the  Confederacy 
were  at  their  zenith  and  when  Jefferson  Davis  had  reason  or 
thought  he  had  reason  to  believe  that  the  independence  of  the 
Confederacy  would  be  recognized  by  England  and   France,  he 


ENGLAND    AND    THE    UNITED    STATES,    1 86 1 -65.       6 1 

manned  with  English  crews,  and  to  receive  aid  and 
comfort  in  Cape  Town,  Singapore  and  other  English 
ports,  in  order  to  attack  the  commerce  of  a  friendly 
nation,  the  Government  of  the  Tsar  not  only  did  not 

sent  Mr.  Lamar,  in  the  capacity  of  special  envoy  and  plenipoten- 
tiary, to  St.  Petersburg  for  the  purpose  of  enlisting  the  good  will 
of  the  Russian  Government,  if  not  its  open  co-operation  with  Eng- 
land and  France  in  the  expected  recognition. 

"  After  two  or  three  interviews  with  de  Morny,  Mr.  Lamar  was 
informally  presented  to  Louis  Napoleon. 

"Touching  the  object  of  Mr.  Lamar's  mission  to  Europe  the 
Emperor  said  that  it  would  be  worse  than  fruitless  for  him  to  ap- 
proach the  court  of  Saint  Petersburg. 

"  He  said  that  the  Emperor  of  Russia  and  all  his  advisers  were 
hopelessly  prejudiced  in  favor  of  the  United  States  ;  that  was  due, 
he  said,  to  two  causes  : 

"  First,  that  Russia,  still  smarting  under  the  sting  of  her  defeat 
by  France  and  England  in  the  Crimean  War,  would  not  make 
common  cause  with  them  in  anything  :  but  would  be  impelled  by 
her  resentment  and  wounded  pride  to  antagonize  any  policy 
which  her  late  enemies  were  known  or  believed  to  favor ;  and  she 
had  reason  to  believe  that  France  and  England  at  that  time 
viewed  the  effort  of  the  Confederacy  with  benevolence. 

'  *  The  second  and  more  important  reason  was  that  the  effort  of 
the  Confederacy  to  disrupt  the  Union  and  establish  independence 
represented  to  the  minds  of  those  in  control  of  Russian  affairs 
the  doctrine  of  separatism,  than  which  no  doctrine  could  be  more 
odious  at  Saint  Petersburg. 

*  *  He  said  that  the  Emperor  of  Russia  was  at  that  moment 
struggling  with  a  movement  in  his  own  dominions  in  the  shape 
of  a  Polish  insurrection,  the  aim  of  which  was  cognate  to  that  of 
the  Confederacy. 

"This  the  Emperor  Napoleon  HL  elaborated  according  to  Mr. 
Lamar's  narrative,  with  great  force  and  perspicuity  and  com- 
pletely convinced  him  that  it  would  be  perfectly  idle  to  ask  the 
Emperor  of  Russia  to  favor  in  the  United  States  a  movement 


62  THE    ALASKA    FRONTIER. 

recognize  the  belligerency  of  the  Confederate  States, 
but  in  addition,  when  the  Emperor  Louis_JSla.poleon 
and  Lord  Palmerston  and  JUQT4..Jx)h 
anxious  to  intervene  in  the  struggle  in  behalf  of  the 

based  upon  a  principle  cognate  to  that  which  he  was  at  that  time 
bringing  all  the  resources  of  his  Empire  to  crush  in  Poland. 

"On  his  part,  Mr.  Lamar  represented  to  the  Emperor  that 
there  would  be  nothing  in  common  between  the  Government  of 
the  United  States  and  that  of  Russia  on  the  grounds  of  political 
principle  ;  on  the  contrary  the  doctrines  on  which  the  two  Gov- 
ernments were  based  were  diametrically  diverse  to  each  other  in 
every  respect. 

* '  The  Emperor  Napoleon  said  that,  while  that  might  be  true  in 
the  academic  sense  or  speculatively,  it  cut  no  figure  in  the  exist- 
ing situation. 

' '  On  the  other  hand,  there  was  a  similarity  between  the  re- 
spective aims  and  interests  which  easily  produced  a  sentimental 
friendliness  and  that  the  step  from  such  a  state  of  feeling  to  acts 
was  a  very  short  one.  At  any  rate,  the  Emperor  Napoleon  said 
it  was  doubtful  whether  Mr.  Lamar  would  be  cordially  received 
in  any  capacity  in  Saint  Petersburg  at  that  time  and  it  was  per- 
fectly certain  not  only  that  he  would  not  be  received  there  as 
the  accredited  envoy  of  the  Southern  Confederacy  but  that  the 
right  of  the  Confederacy  to  ask  recognition  of  its  envoy  would 
be  denied  at  the  outset. 

"Such  action  on  the  part  of  the  Russian  Government  at  that 
time,  the  Emperor  Napoleon  said,  would  have  a  more  or  less 
decisive  influence  adverse  to  the  interests  of  the  Confederacy  at 
other  Courts  of  Europe  and  might  embarrass  the  efforts  of  the 
friends  of  the  Confederacy  in  France  and  in  England. 

"On  the  strength  of  these  representations  Mr.  Lamar  re- 
mained in  Paris  and  proceeded  no  farther  towards  the  execution 
of  his  mission. 

"  He  represented  to  the  Government  at  Richmond  what  he 
had  learned  from  de  Morny  and  Louis  Napoleon  with  the  result 
that  he  was  soon  after  recalled  to  the  South  and  no  further 
attempt  was  made  by  the  Confederate  (Government  to  communi- 
cate in  any  manner  with  the  Imperial  Russian  Government." 


THE    RUSSIAN    FLEETS,     1 863.  63 

Confederacy,*^  the  Em^S£S£--AkJiaildsa:.^te 
refused  to,  join , .ai^vxombuia.tioo  jfiai:., lat^jTveff.tipn  in 
the    American   Civil   War,    and  took    good   care   to 
maice    it    known   that    in    case    any    Power   actively 
sided    with   the    Confederate    States,    Russia  wouLd.. 
support   the    Union    Government.^     The   most   tan- 

^'^  Autobiography  of  John  Stuart  Mill,  New  York,  1879,  page 
268.  Wordsworth  and  the  Coleridge s  by  Ellis  Yarnall,  New 
York,  1899,  page  256.  August  Belmont  in  a  letter  dated  at 
London,  July  30,  1861,  to  William  H.  Seward  wrote  that  Lord 
Palmerston  had  told  him  :  ' '  We  do  not  like  slavery  but  we  want 
cotton,  and  we  dislike  very  much  your  Morrill  tariff," 

England  and  France  agreed  to  act  in  common.  Senate  Ex. 
Doc.  No.  ly  s^ih  Congress,  2d  Session,  pages  106,  225. 

"Concerning  the  attitude  of  Russia  towards  the  United  States 
during  the  Civil  War,  see  : 

Memoir  of  Thurlow  Weed,  edited  by  Thurlow  Weed  Barnes  ; 
Boston,  1884,  Volume  IL,  pages  346-347.  Thurlow  Weed  re- 
lates a  conversation  between  Admiral  Farragut  and  Admiral 
Lessovsky  during  the  winter  of  1863-64  as  follows  : — 

"Admiral  Farragut  lived  at  the  Astor  House,  where  he  was 
frequently  visited  by  the  Russian  Admiral,  between  whom,  when 
they  were  young  officers  serving  in  the  Mediterranean,  a  warm 
friendship  had  grown  up.  Sitting  in  my  room  one  day  after  din- 
ner, Admiral  Farragut  said  to  his  Russian  friend,  '  Why  are  you 
spending  the  winter  here  in  idleness  ? '  T  am  here,'  replied  the 
Russian  Admiral,  *  under  sealed  orders,  to  be  broken  only  in  a 
contingency  that  has  not  yet  occurred.'  He  added  that  other 
Russian  war  vessels  were  lying  off  San  Francisco  with  similar  or- 
ders. During  this  conversation  the  Russian  Admiral  admitted 
that  he  had  received  orders  to  break  the  seals,  if  during  the  Re- 
bellion we  became  involved  in  a  war  with  foreign  nations.  Strict 
confidence  was  then  enjoined." 

******* 

' '  Louis  Napoleon  had  invited  Russia,  as  he  did  England,  to 
unite  with  him  in  demanding  the  breaking  of  our  blockade.     The 


64  THE    ALASKA    FRONTIER. 

gible  proof  that  the  Muscovite  Empire  gave  to  the 

Russian  Ambassador  at  London  informed  his  government  that 
England  was  preparing  for  war  with  America,  on  account  of  the 
seizure  of  Mason  and  Slidell.  Hence  two  fleets  were  immediately 
sent  across  the  Atlantic  under  sealed  orders,  so  that  if  their 
services  were  not  needed,  the  intentions  of  the  Emperor  would 
remain,  as  they  have  to  this  day,  secret.  It  is  certain,  however, 
that  when  our  government  and  Union  were  imperiled  by  a  for- 
midable rebellion,  we  should  have  found  a  powerful  ally  in 
Russia,  had  an  emergency  occurred." 

Mr.  Barnes  then  immediately  adds  : — 

* '  The  latter  revelation  is  corroborated  by  a  well-known  New 
York  gentleman,  who  was  in  St.  Petersburg  when  the  Rebellion 
began,  and  who,  during  an  unofficial  call  upon  Prince  Gort- 
schakofF,  was  shown  by  the  Chancellor  an  order  written  in 
Alexander's  own  hand,  directing  his  Admiral  to  report  to  Presi- 
dent Lincoln  for  orders,  in  case  England  or  France  sided  with 
the  Confederates. ' ' 

The  Alabama  Arbitration  by  Thomas  Willing  Balch,  Phila- 
delphia, 1900,  page  28  et  seq.,  for  an  account  by  George  Peirce, 
Esq.,  of  an  interview  in  1872  between  Ex-Governor  Curtin,  then 
United  States  Minister  at  Saint  Petersburg,  and  Prince  Gortscha- 
koff.  The  Russian  Chancellor  showed  Governor  Curtin  the  orders 
to  the  Russian  admirals,  and  other  important  correspondence. 

A  letter  of  Secretary  Seward  to  John  Bigelow,  Consul-General 
at  Paris,  dated  June  25,  1862,  published  in  the  New  York  Suti, 
January  5th,  1902.  Mr.  Seward  said :  "  Between  you  and  myself 
alone,  I  have  a  belief  that  the  European  state,  whichever  one  it 
may  be,  that  commits  itself  to  intervention  anywhere  in  North 
America,  will  sooner  or  later  fetch  up  in  the  arms  of  a  native  of  an 
oriental  country  not  especially  distinguished  for  amiability  of 
manners  or  temper." 

A  letter  from  Wharton  Barker,  Esq. ,  about  the  policy  of  Russia 
during  the  Civil  War,  printed  in  the  New  York  Sun,  January 
9th,  1 902 .  Mr.  Barker,  for  many  years  a  financial  agent  of  the 
Russian  Government  in  the  United  States,  relates  an  interview 
to  which  he  was  called  in  August  1879,  at  the  Palace  of  Pavlovsk, 
by  the  Emperor  Alexander  the  Second,  and  says  in  part : 


THE    RUSSIAN    FLEETS,     1 863.  65 

world  at  large   of  its  readiness  to  aid  the  Govern- 

' '  With  great  earnestness  and  some  sadness  he  [the  Emperor] 
said  that  in  the  autumn  of  1862  France  and  Great  Britain  pro- 
posed to  Russia  in  a  formal  but  not  in  an  official  way  the  joint  rec- 
ognition by  European  Nations  of  the  independence  of  the  Confed- 
erate States  of  America.  He  said  his  immediate  answer  was,  '  I 
will  not  co-operate  in  such  action  and  I  will  not  acquiesce,  but  on 
the  contrary  I  shall  accept  recognition  of  the  independence  of  the 
Confederate  States  by  France  and  Great  Britain  as  a  casus  belli 
for  Russia,  and  that  the  Governments  of  France  and  Great  Britain 
may  understand  this  is  no  idle  threat,  I  will  send  a  Pacific  fleet  to 
San  Francisco,  and  an  Atlantic  fleet  to  New  York.  Sealed  orders 
to  both  Admirals  were  given.'  After  a  pause  he  proceeded  say- 
ing, '  my  fleets  arrived  at  the  American  ports,  there  was  no  rec- 
ognition of  the  independence  of  the  Confederate  States  by  Great 
Britain  and  France,  the  American  rebellion  was  put  down  and 
the  great  American  Republic  continues.  All  this  I  did  because 
of  love  for  my  own  dear  Russia  rather  than  for  love  of  the 
American  Republic.  I  acted  thus  because  I  understood  that 
Russia  would  have  a  more  serious  task  to  perform  if  the  American 
Republic  with  advanced  industrial  development  was  broken  up 
and  Great  Britain  left  in  control  of  most  branches  of  modern 
industrial  development.'  " 

Narrative  of  the  Mission  to  Russia,  in  1866,  of  the  Hon. 
Gustavus  Vasa  Fox :  New  York,  1873, /aj«w. 

The  New  York  Tribune,  October  2nd,  1863,  page  3. 

The  Life  of  Lord  fohn  Russell,  by  Spencer  Walpole,  London, 
1889:  second  edition.  Volume  II.,  pages  344,  349-352. 

Papers  relating  to  Foreign  Affairs  accompajiying  the  Annual 
Message  of  the  President  to  the  Second  Session  of  the  Thirty- 
eighth  Congress :  Part  III.  ;  Washington,  1865,  page  279. 

lb..  Part  II.,  Washington  1864,  pages  763-779 /ajj^m. 

Abraliam  Lincoln  by  John  G.  Nicolay  and  John  Hay :  New 
York,  1890,  Volume  VI.,  pages  63-66. 

Quelques  Pages  d'  Histoire  Contemporaine  :  Lettres  Politiques, 
by  Provost- Paradol :  Paris,  1 864-1 866,  Volume  II.,  pages  201 
et  seq..  Volume  III.,  page  166. 


66  THE   ALASKA    FRONTIER. 

ment  of  President  Lincoln,  if  foreign  nations  inter- 
fered with  the  American  Government  in  its  efforts 
to  preserve  the  integrity  of  the  United  States,  was 
the  assembling  during  the  autumn  of  1863  ^"  the 
harbors  of  New  York  and  San  Francisco  of  two 
Russian  Fleets.  That  which  collected  at  New  York 
was  under  the  command  of  Admiral  Lessovsky  and 
that  which  assembled  at  San  Francisco  was  under 
the  orders  of  Admiral  Popoff.  ^^ 

"  The  squadron  of  Admiral  Lessovsky  consisted  of  the  flag- 
ship Alexander  Nevski,  the  Osliaba,  the  Peresvet,  the  Variag, 
and  the  Vitiaz.  The  Variag  arrived  in  September,  and  Ad- 
miral Lessovsky  with  his  other  ships  reached  New  York  during 
October.  The  authorities  of  the  city  gave  the  Russians  a  grand 
welcome.  They  showed  the  Russian  officers  over  the  fortifica- 
tions of  the  port,  gave  them  a  public  reception  and  held  a  mili- 
tary review  in  their  honor.  The  significance  of  these  festivities 
were  the  more  marked  in  that  an  English  fleet,  to  whom  only 
the  usual  courtesies  were  extended,  was  also  in  the  harbor  at  the 
time.  In  October,  a  committee  of  leading  citizens  gave  the 
Russian  Officers  a  ball  at  the  Astor  House.  A  few  of  the  gentle- 
men on  the  committee  in  charge  of  the  ball  were  George  Opdyke, 
Mayor  of  New  York,  Charles  P.  Daly,  W.  H.  Aspinwall,  J.  W. 
Beekman,  Elliott  F.  Shepard,  Hamilton  Fish  and  Royal  Phelps. 
(The  Daily  Alta  California,  San  Francisco,  Nov.  18,  1863.) 
Afterwards  Admiral  Lessovsky  took  his  squadron  into  Chesa- 
peake Bay  and  up  the  Potomac  River ;  and  President  Lincoln 
and  Secretary  Seward  gave  the  Russians  a  most  cordial  welcome 
at  Washington. 

It  is  a  curious  coincidence  that,  as  in  1863  the  then  Variag  was 
the  first  of  the  Russian  war  vessels  to  reach  an  American  port,  so, 
too,  a  generation  later,  a  new  Variag  was  the  first  of  the  two  war 
ships — that  the  Messrs.  Cramp  of  Philadelphia  were  then  build- 
ing for  the  Russian  navy — that  was  launched  (1900)  and  put  into 
commission  (1901). 


PURCHASE    OF    RUSSIAN    AMERICA.  6"] 

In  January  1866.  the  LegislajtuTe^ofjhejre^^ 
(now  the  State)  of  Washington  sent  a  memorial  to 
President  Johnson  in  reference  to  the  fishing  question 
in  Russian  American  waters.  This  Memorial,  on  its 
presentation  to  the  President  in  February  1866  was 
referred  to  the  Secretary  of  State,  by  whom  it  was 
communicated  to  M.  de  Stoeckl,  the  Russian  Min- 
ister, with  remarks  on  the  importance  of  some  early 
and  comprehensive  arrangement  between  the  two 
Powers  in  order  to  prevent  the  growth  of  difficul- 
ties, especially  from  the  fisheries  in  that  region. 

About  this  time  Mr.  Cole,  newly  elected  Senator 
from  California,  sought  to  obtain,  in  behalf  of  individ- 
uals in  his  State,  a  license  or  franchise  from  the  Rus- 
sian Government  to  gather  furs  in  a  part  of  Russian 
America.    The  charter  of  the  Russian-American  Com- 

The  fleet  of  Admiral  Popoffat  San  Francisco  consisted  of  the 
Flagship  Bogatyre,  the  Abreck,  the  Calevale,  the  Gaidamack, 
and  the  Rynda.  The  Gaidamack  arrived  first  on  the  i6th  of 
October,  1863,  and  the  Rynda  came  last  on  the  7th  of  the  follow- 
ing month.  On  the  17th  of  November,  1863,  the  civil  and  mili- 
tary authorities  of  San  Francisco  and  California  gave  Admiral 
Popoff  and  his  officers  a  grand  ball.  "  It  was  not,"  to  quote  the 
Alta  California,  "a  mere  ball,  but  also  a  political  demonstra- 
tion." The  committee  that  had  the  ball  in  charge  consisted  of 
the  Hon.  F.  F.  Low,  Governor-elect  of  California  and  chairman  ; 
the  Hon.  Ogden  Hoffinan,  United  States  District  Judge ;  Ad- 
miral C.  H.  Bell,  in  command  of  the  United  States  Pacific  Squad- 
ron ;  Brigadier  General  George  Wright,  in  command  of  the  De- 
partment of  the  Pacific  ;  the  Hon.  Charles  James,  Collector  of  the 
Port  of  San  Francisco  ;  the  Hon.  H.  P.  Coon,  Mayor  of  the  city  ; 
and  many  representative  citizens. 


68  THE    ALASKA   FRONTIER. 

pany  was  about  to  expire.  That  Company  had  already 
sublet  all  its  franchises  on  the  mainland,  from  fifty- 
four  degrees  forty  minutes  up  to  Cross  Sound,  to 
the  Hudson's  Bay  Company.  This  lease  would  ex- 
pire in  June  1867.^  Senator  Cole  had  repeated  con- 
ferences with  M.  de  Stoeckl.  The  latter,  however, 
had  not  authority  to  act ;  and  accordingly  a  com- 
munication was  sent  to  Mr.  Clay,  the  United  States 
Minister  at  St.  Petersburg,  who  brought  the  subject 
to  the  notice  of  the  Imperial  Government. 

During  the  winter  of  1866-67,  Secretary  Seward — 
who  even  as  early  as  i860  had  expressed  in  public 
the  hope  that  Russian  America  would  become  a  part 
of  the  American  Union  ^^ — quietly  conducted  with  M. 
de  Stoeckl,  the  Russian  Minister  at  Washington,  ne- 
gotiations for  the  purchase  of  Russian  America.^'^  In 
renewing,  through  M.  de  Stoeckl,  the  pourparlers  that 
representatives  of  the  two  friendly  nations  had  had 
on  the  subject  years  before,  "  Seward  found  the  Gov- 
ernment of  the  Czar  not  unwilling  to  discuss  it.  Rus- 
sia would  in  no  case  allow  her  American  possessions 
to  pass  into  the  hands  of  any  European  power.  But 
the  United   States  always   had   been   and    probably 

^  Fur  Seal  Arbitration,  Volume  IV.,  page  279. 

**  Seward  at  Washington  as  Senator  and  Secretary  of  State, 
1861-1872,  by  Frederick  W.  Seward,  New  York,  1891,  Volume 
III.,  page  346. 

"  Seward  at  Washington  as  Senator  and  Secretary  of  State, 
1 861-18'/ 2,  by  Frederick  W.  Seward,  New  York,  1891,  Volume 
III.,  page  346. 


PURCHASE   OF   RUSSIAN    AMERICA.  69 

always  would  be  a  friend.  Russian  America  was  a 
remote  province  of  the  Empire,  not  easily  defensible, 
and  not  likely  to  be  soon  developed.  Under  Amer- 
ican control  it  would  develop  more  rapidly,  and 
be  more  easily  defended.  To  Russia,  instead  of  a 
source  of  danger,  it  might  become  a  safeguard.  To 
the  United  States  it  would  give  a  foothold  for  com- 
mercial and  naval  operations,  accessible  from  the 
Pacific  States.  Seward  and  Gortschakoff  were  not 
long  in  arriving  at  an  agreement  over  a  subject 
which,  instead  of  embarrassing  with  conflicting  in- 
terests, presented  some  mutual  advantages."  ^ 

In  October,  1866,  M.  de  Stoeckl,  who  enjoyed  the 
confidence  of  our  Government,  returned  home  on  a 
leave  of  absence.  While  he  was  at  Saint  Petersburg, 
the  subject  of  leasing  to  an  American  Company  the 
rights  that  Russia  had  formerly  rented  to  the  Hud- 
son's Bay  Company,  was  under  consideration.  The 
Russian  Government,  however,  was  opposed  to  any 
such  minor  arrangement.  It  wished  to  hand  over  to 
the  United  States  for  a  fair  consideration  the  whole  of 
Russian  America.  The  possessions  of  distant  Ameri- 
can territory,  lying  across  the  seas,  was  an  element  of 
weakness  to  Russia,  and  the  Empire  was  anxious  to 
part  with  it  to  the  United  States,  a  friendly  power. 
Besides,   Russia,  in  withdrawing   her   flag  from  the 

"*  Seward  at  Washington  as  Senator  and  Secretary  of  State, 
1S61-1872,  by  Frederick  W.  Seward,  New  York,  1891,  Vol- 
ume III.,  page  347. 


70  THE    ALASKA    FRONTIER. 

New  World  to  the  Old,  and  in  preferring  the  United 
States  to  England  as  a  purchaser  of  Russian  Amer- 
ica, evinced  once  more,  as  upon  former  occasions,  her 
friendship  for  the  United  States.  "As  M.  de  Stoeckl 
was  leaving  in  February  [1867]  to  return  to  his  post, 
the  Archduke  Constantine,  the  brother  and  the  chief 
adviser  of  the  Emperor,  handed  him  a  map  with  the 
lines  in  our  Treaty  marked  upon  it  and  told  him  he 
might  treat  for  this  cession."  ^^ 

The  two  Governments  agreed  upon  seven  millions 
two  hundred  thousand  dollars  (<^7, 200,000.)  in  gold  as 
the  purchase  price.  The  final  settlement  was  ar- 
ranged at  the  State  Department  between  Seward 
and  de  Stoeckl  on  the  night  of  March  29-30,  1867.*" 
"  The  treaty  was  then  and  there  engrossed,  signed, 
sealed  and  prepared  for  transmission  to  the  Sen- 
ate." ^^ 

The  morning  after  Seward  and  de  Stoeckl  had 
come  to  an  agreement  about  the  purchase,  Charles 
Sumner,  Chairman  of  the  Committee  on  Foreign 
Relations,  arose  in  the  Senate,  and,  although  an 
opponent  of  President  Johnson,  moved  after  the 
clerk  had  read  the  treaty,  that  favorable  action  should 
be  taken  upon  it. 

"  Sumner's  Speech  1867 :  Fur  Seal  Arbitration,  Volume  IV., 
page  280. 

*"  Seward  at  Washington  as  Senator  and  Secretary  of  State,  by 
Frederick  W.  Seward,  New  York,  1891,  Volume  III.,  page  348. 

"  Information  received  from  Frederick  W.  Seward,  Esq. 


SUMNER  S   SPEECH.  7 1 

Sumner  immediately  began  to  prepare  to  speak 
in  the  Senate  in  favor  of  the  ratification  of  Sew- 
ard's poHcy  of  purchasing  what  was  then  known  as 
Russian  America.  The  Massachusetts  Senator,  in 
the  great  speech  that  he  delivered  in  the  United 
States  Senate  in  the  spring  of  1867,  referred  at  the 
outset  of  his  remarks  to  the  boundaries  of  the  ter- 
ritory which  the  administration  proposed  to  buy  as 
clear  and  definite.     He  began  by  saying :  ^^ 

"  Mr.  President  :  You  have  just  listened  to  the 
reading  of  the  treaty  by  which  Russia  cedes  to 
the  United  States  all  her  possessions  on  the  North 
American  continent  in  consideration  of  ^7,200,000., 
to  be  paid  by  the  United  States.  On  the  one  side  is 
the  cession  of  a  vast  country  with  its  jurisdiction  and 
its  resources  of  all  kinds;  on  the  other  side  is  the 
purchase-money.     Such  is  the  transaction  on  its  face. 

"  In  endeavoring  to  estimate  its  character,  I  am 
glad  to  begin  with  what  is  clear  and  beyond  question. 
I  refer  to  the  boundaries  fixed  by  the  treaty.  Com- 
mencing at  the  parallel  of  54°  40'  north  latitude,  so 
famous  in  our  history,  the  line  ascends  Portland 
Channel  to  the  mountains,  which  it  follows  on  their 
summits  to  the  point  of  intersection  with  the  141^ 
west  longitude,  which  line  it  ascends  to  the  Frozen 
Ocean,  or,  if  you  please,  to  the  north  pole.  This  is 
the  eastern  boundary,  separating   this    region   from 

**  Fur  Seal  Arbitration^  Volume  IV. ,  page  269. 


72  THE    ALASKA    FRONTIER. 

the  British  possessions,  and  it  is  borrowed  from  the 
treaty  between  Russia  and  Great  Britain  in  1825 
establishing  the  relations  between  these  two  Powers 
on  this  continent.  It  will  be  seen  that  this  boundary 
is  old ;  the  rest  is  new." 

Thus  Sumner,  who  had  devoted  much  time  and 
study  in  preparing  for  this  speech,  spoke  in  no  un- 
certain terms  about  the  bounds  of  the  territory  which 
it  was  proposed  to  add  to  the  Union. 

The  services  that  the  Russian  government  had 
rendered  to  that  of  the  Union  during  the  Civil  War 
by  sending  two  fleets  across  the  seas  to  American 
ports  in  order  to  neutralize  the  desire  of  other  gov- 
ernments to  join  in  an  attempt  to  aid  in  the  disrup- 
tion of  the  United  States,  undoubtedly  was  a  potent 
element  in  rallying  support  in  America  for  the  pur- 
chase of  Alaska.^^ 

"  The  following  letter,  written  in  1901,  from  the  son  of  Secre- 
tary Seward  helps  to  clear  up  some  of  the  Russian- American 
relations.  The  Honorable  Frederick  W.  Seward  was  himself 
Assistant  Secretary  of  State  from  1861  to  1869  and  took  part  in 
the  negotiations  for  the  purchase  of  Alaska. 

"  montrose-on-the-hudson, 
"Dec  id,  1901. 
"  My  dear  Sir: 

' '  Your  letter  of  the  6th  has  been  received.  You  are  quite 
right,  both  in  your  statements  and  in  your  conjectures. 

"There  was  no  connection  between  the  visit  of  the  Russian 
Fleet  to  the  United  States  in  1863,  and  the  purchase  of  Russian 
America  in  1867, — except  that  each  was  the  manifestation  of 
Russia's  friendship  and  good- will,  at  different  periods. 


.  -■•will 

\      -.        or 


STATE    DEPARTMENT    MAP,     1 867.  73 

The  Senate  confirmed  the  Treaty.  Then  without 
waiting  for  Congress  to  pass  the  necessary  appro- 
priation to  enable  the  United  States  government  to 
pay  the  purchase  money,  the  Muscovite  government, 
during  the  autumn  of  1867,  formally  and  officially 
transferred  Russian  America  to  the  United  States  ; 
and  the  new  territory  became  from  that  time  known 
by  the  name  chosen  by  Secretary  William  H.  Sew- 
ard— Alaska. 

In  buying  Alaska,  the  United  States  understood 
that  they  obtained  from  Russia  a  continuous,  unin- 
terrupted strip  of  land  on  the  continent  from  Mount 
Saint  Elias  to  the  Portland  Canal,  whereby  Great 
Britain  was  shut  off  from  access  to  the  Pacific  Ocean 

' '  There  was  no  request,  no  arrangement,  no  equivalent  in  ref- 
erence to  the  Russian  Fleet.  Prince  Gortschakoff  was  a  very 
sagacious  diplomatist.  He  sent  over  the  Fleet  and  said  it  was  here 
*  for  no  unfriendly  purpose.'  Of  course  we  knew  that  we  might 
count  on  its  aid,  if  needed,  but  fortunately  we  did  not  need  it.  The 
exchange  of  public  hospitalities  showed  how  it  was  regarded  on 
both  sides. 

"  I  have  endeavored  in  my  '  Life  and  Letters  of  W.  H.  S.'  to 
narrate  the  events  and  incidents  of  1863  and  1867,  just  as  I  saw 
and  heard  or  took  part  in  them.  But  all  histories  are  apt  to  get 
embroidered  with  a  fringe  of  romantic  fiction,  as  time  goes  on.  I 
do  not  know  who  invented  that  about  Alaska.  Probably  it  'just 
grew.' 

' '  Your  information  from  Russian  sources  about  the  Emperor 
Alexander's  views,  entirely  accords  with  my  own  understanding 
of  the  matter. 

' '  Very  sincerely  yours, 

"  FREDERICK  W.  SEWARD. 
"  Mr.  T.  W.  Balch." 


74  THE    ALASKA    FRONTIER. 

above  fifty-four  degrees  forty  minutes.  Secretary 
Seward  and  Senator  Sumner  so  interpreted  the  pur- 
chase. The  State  Department,  on  a  map  it  issued 
at  the  time,  gave  a  visual  effect  of  what  the  United 
States  thought  they  had  bought  from  Russia.  (See 
Map  No.  17.)  This  map,  which  Sumner  used,  was 
pubHshed,  together  with  his  speech,  in  pamphlet 
form.  Upon  this  map,  the  eastern  boundary  of 
the  pan-handle  or  lisiere  of  Russian  America  or 
Alaska  —  which  latter  name,  meaning  in  the  local 
tongue  "  Great  Land,"  Secretary  Seward  gave  to 
the  purchased  territory  after  it  had  come  into  the 
possession  of  the  United  States — was  drawn  so  as 
to  include  within  the  bounds  of  Alaska  all  the  sin- 
uosities that  cut  into  the  mainland  between  fifty- 
four  degrees  forty  minutes  north  and  Mount  Saint 
Elias.  The  frontier  line  as  thus  laid  down  fol- 
lowed the  eastern  boundary  of  Alaska  as  Krusen- 
stern  (1827)  and  Piadischeff  (1829)  and  Bouchette 
(1831)  and  Arrowsmith  (1834)  had  drawn  it  on  their 
maps ;  and  to  the  frontier  as  thus  marked  the  English 
Government  made  no  protest.  General  Banks,  chair- 
man of  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Affairs  in  the 
House  so  understood  it.^  The  British  Government 
made  no  protest  to  the  territorial  claims  asserted  in 

"  speech  of  Hon.  Nathaniel  P.  Banks  of  Massachusetts,  de- 
livered in  the  House  of  Representatives,  June  jo,  1868.  F.  &  J. 
Rives  and  Geo.  A.  Bailey,  Reporters  and  Printers  of  the  Debates 
of  Congress,  page  6. 


Map  published  by  the  State  Department  of  the  United  States,  1867. 

MAP  No.   17. 


76  THE    ALASKA    FRONTIER. 

Sumner's  speech  itself  or  to  their  exemplification  on 
the  map  of  the  State  Department. 

Besides,  by  subsequent  acts  and  maps,  the  British 
Government  confirmed  the  United  States  Govern- 
ment in  its  belief  that  it  had  bought  from  Russia, 
along  with  the  rest  of  Alaska,  a  tongue  of  territory 
that,  extending  from  Mount  Saint  Elias  to  the  Port- 
land Channel,  passed  around  all  the  sinuosities  of 
the  coast  and  sufficiently  far  inland  to  altogether 
exclude  Canadian  territory  from  touching  tide  water 
on  the  Pacific  coast  at  any  point  above  fifty-four 
degrees  forty  minutes  north  latitude. 

A  notable  instance  of  what  English  cartographers 
thought  was  the  area  of  Alaska  was  given  in  1867, 
at  about  the  time  of  the  sale  by  Russia  to  the  United 
States  of  Russian  America.  In  that  year  Black's 
General  Atlas  of  the  World  was  published  at  Edin- 
burgh. In  the  introduction  of  this  work,  the  fol- 
lowing description  of  Russian  America  is  given  : 

"  Russian  America  comprehends  the  N.  W.  portion 
of  the  continent,  with  the  adjacent  islands,  extend- 
ing from  Behring  Strait  E.  to  the  meridian  of  Mount 
St.  Elias  (about  141°  W.),  and  from  that  mountain 
southward  along  the  Maritime  chain  of  hills  till  it 
touches  the  coast  about  54°  40'." 

Then,  on  three  maps  of  this  atlas,  "  The  World," 
No.  2,  "  The  World  on  Mercator's  Projection,"  No.  3, 
and  "  North  America,"  No.  39,  the  Russian  territory 
from    Mount   Saint   Elias   down  to   the  end   of  the 


IMPORTANT    MAPS.  77 

Portland  Canal  at  fifty-four  degrees  forty  minutes  is 
marked  so  as  to  include  within  the  Muscovite  pos- 
sessions all  the  fiords  and  estuaries  along  the  coast 
and  thus  to  exclude  and  cut  off  the  British  territory 
entirely  from  all  access  to  tide  water  above  fifty-four 
degrees  forty  minutes.  In  addition  there  is  given 
a  small  map  marked  at  the  top,  "  Supplementary 
sketch  map,  Black's  General  Atlas,  for  plate  41,"  and 
at  the  bottom,  "United  States  after  Cession  of  Rus- 
sian-America, April  1867,  Coloured  Blue."  On  this 
sketch  map  the  territory  purchased  by  the  United 
States  is  marked,  "  Formerly  Russian  America,"  and, 
like  the  rest  of  the  United  States,  it  is  colored  blue. 
And  the  boundary  of  the  new  territory  of  Alaska 
is  given  as  upon  the  other  three  maps  of  this  Atlas, 
Nos.  2,  3  and  39,  already  cited,  according  to  Brue's 
map  of  1825,  Krusenstern's  map  of  1827,  and  the 
Canadian  and  the  English  maps  already  referred 
to,  and  in  accordance  with  the  territorial  claim  that 
Russia  and  the  United  States  have  always  maintained 
and  acted  upon. 

Many  other  maps  can  be  mentioned  in  addition  to 
those  above  quoted  against  Britain's  recent  claim. 
For  examples,  Petermann's  map  in  the  Mittheilungen 
of  April,  1869;  Hermann  Berghaus's  "Chart  of  the 
World  on  Mercator's  Projection,"  1871^  (see  Map 
No.  18);  Alexander  Keith  Johnston's  map  of  "  North 
America "    in   his    Handy   Royal  Atlas   of  Modern 

**  Published  by  Justus  Perthes,  Gotha. 


Hermann  Berghaus's  Chart  of  the  World,  187 i. 
MAP   No.    18. 


IMPORTANT   MAPS.  79 

Geography  published  at  Edinburgh  and  London,  in 
1881  ;  E.  Andriveau-Goujon's  map  of"  TAmerique 
du  Nord,"  published  at  Paris  in  1887,  and  finally  the 
wall  map  (1897)  o^  ^^  "  United  States"  by  Edward 
Stanford,^^  an  important  map  maker  of  London  to- 
day, give  to  Alaska  the  limits  always  claimed  since 
1825  by  Russia  and  the  United  States.^' 

**  The  United  States  :  London  ;  published  by  Edward  Stanford, 
26  and  27  Cockspur  St.,  Charing  Cross,  S.  W.,  15th  July,  1897. 

*^The  following  maps  support  the  United  States  claim  to  an 
unbroken  lisi^re  : 

America  :  A  new  General  Atlas,  Edinburgh,  printed  by  John 
Stark,  1830, 

Nord- America^  verlag  von  L.  Pabst,  Darmstadt,  ante  1846. 

America,  Verlag  des  Geographischen  Instituts,  Weimar,  1853. 

Nord-Amerika,  politische  Ubersicht  von  E.  von  Sydow,  Justus 
Perthes,  Gotha,  1856. 

Nord- America,  Berlin  bei  Dietrich  Reimer,  i860. 

Allgemeine  Welt  Karte  in  Mercatot'  s  Projection  von  Hermann 
Berghaus,  1868. 

Map  of  the  Yukon  or  Kwich-Pak  River  at  the  end  of  Travel 
and  Adventure  in  the  Territory  of  Alaska  by  Frederick  Whym- 
per:  London,  John  Murray,  1868. 

Map  in  Alaska,  Reisen  und  erlebnisse  im  hohen  Norden  von 
Frederick  Whymper,  1869  (German  translation). 

Sibirien  und  Russich  Am^rika  von  Spruner-Menke :  Hist. 
Handatlas,  No.  72  :  Justus  Perthes,  Gotha,  1871. 

Nord-Amerika  von  K.  Bamberg,  Weimar ;  verlag  der 
Deutschen    Reichsbuchhandlung  C.  Chun,  Berlin,   1881. 

General  Map  of  North  America  by  W.  &  A.  K.  Johnston, 
Geographers  to  the  Queen,  Edinburgh  and  London,  1887. 

Am^rique  du  Nord  par  F[r^re]  A[leiis]  M[arie]  G[ochet] 
des  E  [coles]  Chr^tiennes  :  Paris  and  Orleans,  1891. 

Amirique  du  Nord:  Institut  National  de  G6ographie,  Brux- 
elles,  1 89 1. 


8o  THE    ALASKA    FRONTIER. 

Some  maps — for  example,  "  The  World  "  by  James 
Gardner,  published  in  1825  and  dedicated  "To  His 
Most  Gracious  Majesty  George  the  IVth  " ;  "  Nord 
America,  Entworfen  und  gezeichnet  von  C.  F.  Wei- 
land,"  1826  ;  and  a  "  Carte  Physique  et  Politique  par 
A.  H.  Brue,"  1827 — bring  the  Russian  boundary  on 
the  mainland  from  Mount  Saint  Elias  down  only  to 
a  point  about  half  way  opposite  Prince  of  Wales 
Island  at  about  fifty-six  degrees  and  then  along  the 
fiords  so  as  to  include  all  of  Prince  of  Wales  Island 
in  the  Russian  Territory,  instead  of  carrying  the 
frontier  to  the  top  of  the  Portland  Canal  and  then 
down  to  the  sea  at  about  fifty-four  degrees  and  forty 
minutes.  But  for  all  the  territory  above  the  point 
on  the  continent  about  half  way  opposite  Prince  of 
Wales  Island  up  to  the  one  hundred  and  forty-first 
degree  west  from  Greenwich,  these  maps  give  the 
divisional  line  between  the  Muscovite  and  the  Brit- 
ish territories  far  enough  inland  and  around  the 
sinuosities  of  the  coast  so  as  to  cut  off  the  British 
territory  from  all  contact  with  tide  water.  Besides, 
Weiland,  in  a  map  of  1843  corrected  his  error  in  his 
map  of  1826,  in  stopping  a  little  short  of  the  Port- 

Amtrique  Septentrionale :  Institut  National  de  Geographic, 
Bruxelles,  1892. 

The  British  Colonies  and  Possessions :  Edward  Stanford, 
London,  May  24th,  1897. 

Puissance  du  Canada:  Atlas  de  Geographic  Modeme  par 
F.  Schrader,  directenr  des  travaux  cartographiques  de  la  librairie 
Hachette  et  Cie,  Paris,  1899. 


A- Port  Condicrwiv. 

•o- : Vahru^burxf 

^■\  —^-Cofnden.' 
I>:(ZruU  dlAffUch, 
E-PortProU-c/wn 
£■  CansU  da  Stymoiir 
G-.BaicHfiod 
H.Arua  def  Traitre^ 


'•'WJvy< 


^•XAvX^'jfe^^ 


Bru6's  Map  of  1833. 

MAP  No.   19. 


82  THE    ALASKA   FRONTIER. 

land  Canal  in  marking  the  Russo-Canadian  bound- 
ary;  and  in  Brue's  maps  of  1833  (see  Map  No.  19) 
and  1839  (see  Map  No.  20)  the  divisional  line  is 
given  as  it  was  marked  on  his  map  of  1825.  Gard- 
ner's map  is  overwhelmed  by  the  multitude  of  Eng- 
lish and  Canadian  maps — governmental  and  private — 
that  followed  Krusenstern's  delineation  of  the  line 
of  demarcation.  And  additional  proof  of  how  far 
south  the  negotiators  of  the  treaty  of  1825  in- 
tended that  the  Russian  lisiere  should  extend  when 
they  used  the  phrase,  "  la  dite  ligne  remontera  au 
nord  le  long  de  la  passe  dite  Portland  Channel, 
jusqu'au  point  de  la  terre  ferme  ou  elle  atteint  le 
56*  degre  de  latitute  nord,"  is  clearly  shown  by  Van- 
couver's chart  upon  which  he  inscribed  the  name 
"  Portland  Canal."  ^» 

Time  passed.  In  1871,  British  Columbia  became 
a  part  of  the  Dominion  of  Canada.  And  from  1872 
to  1884  Canada,  by  a  number  of  acts  and  maps, 
recognized  the  validity  of  the  American  claims  to 
an  unbroken  strip  or  lisiere  upon  the  continental 
shore. 

In  1872,  Sir  Edward  Thornton,  acting  on  his  in- 
structions from  the  British  Foreign  Office,  which  was 
serving  as  the  intermediary  for  the  Government  of 
Canada,  proposed  to  Secretary  Hamilton  Fish,  the  ad- 

**  A  Chart  showing  part  of  the  Coast  of  N.  W.  America  with 
the  tracks  of  His  Majesty  s  Sloop  Discovery  and  Armed  Tender 
Chatham  commmided  by  George  Vancouver  :  London,  1 798. 


BRUii's  Map  of  1839:  "Nouvelle  Carte  de  l'Am6rique 
Septentrionale.  ' ' 


MAP  No.   20. 


84  THE    ALASKA    FRONTIER. 

visability  of  having  a  survey  made  of  the  territory 
through  which  the  boundary  ran,  so  that  the  frontier 
could  be  located  exactly,  and  Mr.  Fish  thought  well 
of  the  idea  and  said  that  he  would  urge  Congress 
to  provide  funds  for  such  a  survey. 

On  December  2d,  1872,  President  Grant,  in  his 
annual  message  to  Congress,  said,  after  referring  to 
the  then  recent  settlement  of  the  San  Juan  boundary 
dispute :  ^^ 

**  Experience  of  the  difficulties  attending  the  de- 
termination of  our  admitted  line  of  boundary,  after 
the  occupation  of  the  territory  and  its  settlement  by 
those  owing  allegiance  to  the  respective  Govern- 
ments, points  to  the  importance  of  establishing,  by 
natural  objects  or  other  monuments,  the  actual  line 
between  the  territory  acquired  by  purchase  from 
Russia  and  the  adjoining  possessions  of  Her  Britan- 
nic Majesty.  The  region  is  now  so  sparsely  occupied 
that  no  conflicting  interests  of  individuals  or  of  juris- 
diction are  likely  to  interfere  to  the  delay  or  embar- 
rassment of  the  actual  location  of  the  line.  If  de- 
ferred until  population  shall  enter  and  occupy  the 
territory  some  trivial  contest  of  neighbors  may  again 
array  the  two  Governments  in  antagonism.  I  there- 
fore recommend  the  appointment  of  a  commission, 
to  act  jointly  with  one  that  may  be  appointed  on  the 
part  of  Great  Britain,  to  determine  the  line  between 

**  Senate  Ex.  Doc.  No.  14J,  49th  Congress,  ist  Session, 
page  3. 


SURVEYOR-GENERAL   DENNIS  S   OPINION.  85 

our  territory  of  Alaska  and  the  coterminous  posses- 
sions of  Great  Britain." 

It  was  estimated  that  a  survey  of  the  Alaskan 
boundary  line  would  cost  the  United  States  some- 
thing like  a  million  and  a  half  of  dollars  ;  and  that 
it  would  probably  require  nine  years  in  the  field  and 
another  year  to  map  the  result.  The  suggestion  of 
President   Grant  was  not  acted  upon  by  Congress. 

At  that  time  no  mention  was  made  of  Canada's 
present  claim  that  she  is  entitled  to  the  upper  part 
of  many  or  all  of  the  fiords  or  sinuosities  that  cut 
into  the  mainland  above  fifty-four  degrees  forty 
minutes. 

On  the  contrary,  the  Surveyor-General  of  Canada, 
J.  S.  Dennis,  in  a  written  communication  in  1874  to 
the  Minister  of  the  Interior  of  the  Dominion,  gave  his 
opinion  that  it  would  be  sufficient  at  that  time  to 
determine  exactly  the  points  at  which  the  frontier 
crosses  the  rivers.     He  wrote  at  length  : 

"The  undersigned  is  of  opinion  that  it  is  unneces- 
sary at  present  (and  it  may  be  for  all  time)  to  incur 
the  expense  of  determining  and  marking  any  portion 
of  the  boundary  under  consideration  other  than  at 
certain  of  the  points  mentioned  in  the  extract  alluded 
to  in  the  dispatch  of  Sir  Edward  Thornton  to  the  Earl 
of  Granville,  dated  the  15th  of  February,  1873,  that  is 
to  say : — 

"I.  The  head  of  the  Portland  Canal  or  the  intersec- 
tion of  the  same  by  the  56th  parallel  of  north  latitude. 


86  THE    ALASKA    FRONTIER. 

**  2.  The  crossing  of  the  following  rivers  on  the  Pa- 
cific coast  by  the  said  boundary,  that  is  to  say :  The 
Rivers  •  Skoot,'  *  Stakeen,'  *  Taku,'  'Isilcat'  and 
'Chilkaht.' 

"  3.  The  points  where  the  one  hundred  and  forty- 
first  meridian  west  of  Greenwich  crosses  the  rivers 
Yukon  and  Porcupine. 

"There  is  no  object  to  be  gained  of  which  the  un- 
dersigned is  aware  in  fixing  the  intersection  of  the 
boundary  along  the  coast  with  the  141st  meridian  as- 
sumed to  be  on  Mount  Elias,  that  expenditure,  there- 
fore, may  be  saved."  He  added  further,  "the  United 
States  surveys  of  the  coast  could  be  advantageously 
used  to  locate  the  coast  line  in  deciding  the  mouths 
of  the  rivers  in  question,  as  points  from  whence  the 
necessary  triangulation  surveys  should  commence  in 
order  to  determine  the  ten  marine  leagues  back."  In 
addition  a  United  States  Coast  Survey  map,  "  Certi- 
fied Dom"  Lands  Office,  January  i6th,  1878,"  by  Sur- 
veyor-General Dennis,  was  published  in  connection 
with  this  letter,  with  the  boundary  line  starting  from 
the  top  of  the  "  Portland  Canal "  and  crossing  the 
Skoot,  Stikine  and  Taku  Rivers  ten  leagues  back 
from  the  coast.^"  .  (See  Map  No.  21.) 

The  fact  that  Mr.  Dennis  said  that  the  boundary 
crossed  the  Skoot  River  and  also  that  he  approved 

"  Sessional  Papers,  Volume  XL,  Fifth  Session  of  the  Third 
Parliament  of  the  Dominion  of  Canada,  session  1878  (No.  125) 
page  28  and  the  map  vis-a-vis. 


«"  ICY  STKf^^Jinr^ 


Tbe  BurluMl  DeobaniK  LliL  C  MonlreaL 


Certified 


Dom^ Lands  Office 
Jan.  /6'^?  fSrS. 


Map  published  in  Canadian  Sessional  Papers,  1878. 

MAP  No.   21. 


88  THE    ALASKA   FRONTIER. 

of  a  map  which  showed  the  boundary  crossing  the 
Skoot  River,  are  especially  noteworthy  evidence 
against  the  Canadian  demands.  For  the  Skoot  River 
does  not  come  to  tidewater  at  all,  but  flows  into 
the  Stikine  some  distance  from  the  sea. 

Again,  in  the  case  of  Peter  Martin  in  1876,  the 
British  and  the  Canadian  Governments  recognized 
through  the  settlement  of  that  incident  by  the  British 
Foreign  Office  that  on  the  Stikine  River  Canada  did 
not  touch  tide  water. 

It  was  in  1876,  while  taking  a  prisoner  named 
Peter  Martin,  who  was  condemned  in  the  Cassiar  dis- 
trict of  British  Columbia  for  some  act  committed  in 
Canadian  territory,  from  the  place  where  he  was  con- 
victed to  the  place  where  he  was  to  be  imprisoned, 
that  Canadian  constables  crossed  with  the  prisoner 
the  United  States  territory  lying  along  the  Stikine 
River.  They  encamped  with  Martin  at  a  point  some 
thirteen  miles  up  the  river  from  its  mouth.  There 
Martin  attempted  unsuccessfully  to  escape,  and  made 
an  assault  on  an  officer.  Upon  his  arrival  at  Vic- 
toria, the  capital  of  British  Columbia,  he  was  tried 
and  convicted  for  his  attempted  escape  and  attack 
upon  the  constable ;  and  the  court  sentenced  him. 
The  Secretary  of  State,  Hamilton  Fish,  protested 
against  this  infringement  of  the  territorial  sovereignty 
of  the  United  States  in  the  Territory  of  Alaska.  In  a 
letter  to  Sir  Edward  Thornton,  the  English  Minister 
at  Washington,  he  said:    "I  have  the  honor,  there- 


PETER    martin's   CASE.  89 

fore,  to  ask  again  your  attention  to  the  subject  and 
to  remark  that  if,  as  appears  admittedly  to  be  the 
fact,  the  colonial  officers  in  transporting  Martin  from 
the  place  at  which  he  was  convicted  to  his  place  of 
imprisonment,  via  the  Stickine  River,  did  conduct 
him  within  and  through  what  is  the  unquestioned 
territory  of  the  United  States,  a  violation  of  the 
sovereignty  of  the  United  States  has  been  committed, 
and  the  recapture  and  removal  of  the  prisoner  from 
the  jurisdiction  of  the  United  States  to  British  soil 
is  an  illegal  act,  violent  and  forcible  act,  which 
cannot  justify  the  subsequent  proceedings  whereby 
he  has  been,  is  or  may  be  restricted  of  his  liberty." 

The  transit  of  the  constables  with  their  prisoner, 
Martin,  through  American  territory  was  not  due  to 
a  mistake  on  their  part  as  to  the  extent  of  Canadian 
territory,  for  J.  B.  Lovell,  a  Canadian  Justice  of  the 
Peace  in  the  Cassiar  district  of  British  Columbia 
wrote  to  Captain  Jocelyn  in  command  at  Fort  Wran- 
gel,  saying :  "  The  absence  of  any  jail  here  (Glen- 
ora,  Cassiar),  or  secure  place  of  imprisonment  neces- 
sitates sending  him  through  as  soon  as  possible,  and 
I  hope  you  will  excuse  the  liberty  we  take  in  forward- 
ing him  through  United  States  territory  without  spe- 
cial permission."  After  an  investigation  into  the 
facts  of  the  case,  the  Dominion  Government  acknowl- 
edged the  justness  of  Secretary  Fish's  protest  by 
"  setting  Peter  Martin  at  liberty  without  further 
delay;"  and  thus  recognized  that  the  Canadian  con- 


90  THE    ALASKA    FRONTIER. 

Stables  who  had  Martin  in  their  charge  when  they 
encamped  on  the  Stikine  thirteen  miles  up  from  the 
mouth  of  the  river,  were  on  United  States  soil,  and 
so  that  Canada's  jurisdiction  in  that  region  did  not 
extend  to  tide  water.^^ 

Another  recognition  by  the  British  Empire  that  the 
lisiere  restricted  Canadian  sovereignty  from  contact 
with  the  sea,  occurred  shortly  after  the  case  of  Peter 
Martin. 

Owing  to  a  clash  between  the  United  States  and 
the  Canadian  customs  officials  as  to  the  extent  of 
their  respective  jurisdiction  on  the  Stikine  River, 
their  two  Governments  agreed  in  1878  upon  a  pro- 
visional boundary  line  across  that  river.  The  Ca- 
nadian Government  had  sent  in  March  1877  one  of 
its  engineer  officers,  Joseph  Hunter,  "  to  execute," 
in  the  language  of  Sir  Edward  Thornton  to  Secretary 
Evarts,  "  a  survey  of  a  portion  of  the  Stikine  River, 
for  the  purpose  of  defining  the  boundary  line  where 
it  crosses  that  river  between  the  Dominion  of  Canada 
and  the  Territory  of  Alaska."  This  Canadian  engi- 
neer. Hunter,  after  measuring  from  Rothsay  Point  at 
the  mouth  of  the  Stikine  River,  a  distance  ten  marine 
leagues  inland,  determined — in  the  light  of  Articles 
III.  and  IV.  of  the  Anglo-Russian  Treaty  of  February 
16/28,  1825,  which  two  Articles  he  was  instructed  ex- 

'''^  Papers  relating  to  the  Foreign  Relations  of  the  United  States: 
Washington  ;  Government  Printing  Office,  1877,  pages  266,  267, 
271. 


HUNTER  S   SURVEY.  9 1 

pressly  "  by  direction  of  the  minister  of  the  interior  " 
to  consider  in  locating  the  boundary — that  the  fron- 
tier crossed  the  Stikine  at  a  point  about  twenty-five 
miles  up  the  river  and  almost  twenty  miles  in  a 
straight  line  from  the  coast.  Without  considering 
whether,  owing  to  the  break  in  the  water  shed  caused 
by  the  passage  of  the  Stikine  through  the  mountains, 
the  United  States  territory  extends  inland  to  the  full 
extent  of  thirty  miles,  Hunter  decided  that  the  line 
should  cross  the  river  at  a  point  twenty  miles  back 
from  the  coast,  but  still  far  enough  back  from  the 
mouth  of  the  river  to  shut  off  Canadian  territory 
from  contact  in  that  district  with  the  sea.  He  came 
to  this  decision,  because  he  found  that  at  that  point 
a  range  of  mountains,  parallel  to  the  coast,  crossed 
the  Stikine  River,  and,  as  he .  stated  expressly  in 
his  report  to  his  chief,  he  acted  upon  the  theory 
that  this  mountain  range  followed  the  shore  line 
within  the  meaning  of  the  treaty  of  1825  as  he 
understood  it.  In  his  report  to  his  Government  he 
said  :  "  Having  identified  Rothsay  Point  on  the 
coast  at  the  delta  of  the  Stikine  River,  a  monu- 
ment was  erected  thereon,  from  which  the  survey 
of  the  river  was  commenced,  and  from  which  was 
estimated  the  ten  marine  leagues  referred  to  in  the 
convention."  The  Canadian  Government  sent  a 
copy  of  this  report  together  with  a  map  explaining 
it  through  the  British  Foreign  Office  to  Sir  Edward 
Thornton    at    Washington,    who    communicated    it 


92  THE   ALASKA   FRONTIER. 

to  Secretary'  William  M.  Evarts,  with  the  purpose 
of  obtaining  his  acceptance  of  this  boundary.  Mr. 
Evarts  agreed  to  accept  it  as  a  provisional  line,  but 
with  the  reservation  that  it  should  not  in  any  way 
prejudice  the  rights  of  the  two  Governments,  when- 
ever a  joint  survey  was  made  to  determine  the  fron- 
tier. By  this  voluntary  proposal  of  a  provisional 
boundary  across  the  Stikine  River,  the  British  and 
the  Canadian  Governments  showed  that  in  1877  and 
1878  they  considered  that  Canadian  territory  above 
the  point  of  fifty-four  degrees  forty  minutes  was  re- 
stricted by  the  meaning  of  Articles  III.  and  IV.  of 
the  Anglo-Muscovite  Treaty  of  1825  from  access  to 
the  sea.^^  More  recent  explorations  in  the  valley 
of  the  Stikine  as  well  as  the  fact  that  Surveyor- 
General  Dennis  of  Canada  recognized  in  1874  that 
the  boundary  line  should  cross  the  Skoot  River, 
shows  that  the  point  fixed  by  the  Canadian,  Hunter, 
in  1878  was  too  near  the  coast  line.  The  frontier 
should  be  drawn  still  further  inland. 

In  1885,  President  Cleveland,  in  his  first  annual 
message  to  Congress,  recommended  with  prudent 
foresight,  a  preliminary  survey  of  the  Alaskan-British 
Columbian  boundary  line,  with  a  view  of  locating  ex- 
actly where  that  frontier  should  run  before  the  devel- 

*'  Papers  relating  to  the  Foreign  Relations  of  the  United 
States:  Washington;  Government  Printing  Office,  1878,  page 
339. 


CLEVELAND  S    MESSAGE.  93 

opment   of  immediately   local   interests    complicated 
the  settlement  of  the  boundary.     He  said  :  ^' 

"  The  frontier  line  between  Alaska  and  British 
Columbia,  as  defined  by  the  treaty  of  cession  with 
Russia,  follows  the  demarcation  assigned  in  a  prior 
treaty  between  Great  Britain  and  Russia.  Modern 
exploration  discloses  that  this  ancient  boundary  is 
impracticable  as  a  geographical  fact.  In  the  unsettled 
condition  of  that  region  the  question  has  lacked  im- 
portance, but  the  discovery  of  mineral  wealth  in  the 
territory  the  line  is  supposed  to  traverse  admonishes 
that  the  time  has  come  when  an  active  knowledge  of 
a  boundary  is  needful  to  avert  jurisdictional  compli- 
cations. I  recommend,  therefore,  that  provision  be 
made  for  a  preliminary  reconnaissance  by  officers  of 
the  United  States,  to  the  end  of  acquiring  more  pre- 
cise information  on  the  subject.  I  have  invited  Her 
Majesty's  Government  to  consider  with  us  the  adop- 
tion of  a  more  convenient  line,  to  be  established  by 
meridian  observations  or  by  known  geographical  fea- 
tures without  the  necessity  of  an  expensive  survey 
of  the  whole." 

In  accordance  with  the  President's  instructions,  Mr. 
Bayard,  the  Secretary  of  State,  wrote  at  length  on 
November  20,  1885,  to  Mr.  Phelps,  United  States 
Minister  at  London,  concerning  the  advantages  of 

^  A  Compilation  of  the  Messages  and  Papers  of  the  Presidents, 
1 789-1 897,  by  James  D.  Richardson,  a  Representative  from  the 
State  of  Tennessee  :  Washington,  1898,  Volume  VIII.,  page  332. 


94  THE    ALASKA    FRONTIER. 

settling  exactly  where  the  boundary  between  Alaska 
and  British  Columbia  ran.^  Mr.  Bayard  instructed 
in  his  communication  Mr.  Phelps  to  ask  the  Marquis 
of  Salisbury  for  "  an  early  expression  of  his  views 
touching  the  expediency  of  appointing  an  interna- 
tional commission  "  to  fix  at  the  earliest  possible  op- 
portunity upon  a  "  conventional  boundary  line "  in 
substantial  accord  with  the  provisions  of  the  Anglo- 
Muscovite  treaty  of  1825. 

On  January  12,  1886,  Mr.  Phelps  in  an  interview 
with  the  Marquis  of  Salisbury,  discussed  thoroughly 
the  boundary  line  between  Alaska  and  British  Co- 
lumbia ;  and  he  proposed  to  the  English  Secretary  of 
Foreign  Affairs  that  the  two  nations  should  appoint 
a  joint  commission  for  the  purpose  of  ascertaining 
how  the  line  should  run.^  Lord  Salisbury  received 
the  proposition  with  favor,  but  he  desired  before  pro- 
ceeding further  with  the  discussion  of  the  subject,  to 
communicate  first  by  mail  with  the  Government  of 
the  Dominion. 

The  Canadian  Government,  while  unwilling  that 
the  British  Empire  should  agree  with  the  United 
States  for  a  joint  commission  to  investigate  where  the 
boundary  line  ran,  looked  with  favor  upon  President 
Cleveland's  suggestion  of  a  preliminary  survey  of  the 

"  Senate  Ex.  Doc.  No.  i^j,  /fgth  Congress,  ist  Session,  page 
2  et  seq. 

^  Senate  Ex.  Doc.  No.  14J,  4gth  Congress,  ist  Session,  page 
13,  etseq. 


BAYARD    AND    SALISBURY.  95 

country  in  question.  And  the  British  Government  in 
April  1886,  announced  to  the  United  States  its  will- 
ingness to  agree  to  such  a  preliminary  reconnais- 
sance.^ In  this  correspondence  both  Mr.  Bayard  and 
-Mr.  Phelps,  realizing  the  great  difficulty  of  locating 
exactly  the  boundary  along  the  eastern  side  of  the 
Alaskan  lisiere,^^  showed  their  willingness  to  consent 
to  some  mutual  agreement  with  Great  Britain  of 
"give  and  take"  in  running  that  line.  But  they  made 
it  perfectly  clear  in  their  communications  upon  the 
subject — Mr.  Bayard  in  his  letters  to  Mr.  Phelps,  and 
the  latter  in  his  to  the  English  Ministers — that  they 
understood  that  the  United  States  had  in  any  case  an 
unbroken  and  continuous  lisiere  on  the  mainland.^ 
And  in  the  whole  correspondence  no  hint,  even  much 
less  any  formal  statement,  was  made  on  the  part  of 
the  British  authorities  that  the  English  Empire  had 
any  right  to  any  territory  touching  tide  water  above 
fifty-four  degrees  forty  minutes. 

Apparently  as  a  result  of  this  interchange  of  views 
between  the  two  Governments,  the  subject  was  taken 

"  Lord  Rosebery's  letter  of  April  15,  1886,  to  Mr.  Phelps: 
Senate  Ex.  Doc.  No.  14J,  4gth  Congress,  ist  Session,  page  19. 

"  "  The  coast  proves,  upon  survey,  to  be  so  extremely  irregular 
and  indented,  with  such  and  so  many  projections  and  inlets  that  it 
is  not  possible,  except  at  immense  expense  of  time  and  money  to 
run  a  line  that  shall  be  parallel  with  it."  Mr.  Phelps  to  the  Mar- 
quis of  Salisbury,  January  19,  1886,  Senate  Ex.  Doc.  No.  14J, 
page  14. 

^  Senate  Ex.  Doc.  No.  14J,  ^gth  Congress,  ist  Session. 


96  THE    ALASKA    FRONTIER. 

up  during  the  session  of  the  Fisheries  Conference  of 
1 887-1 888  that  was  held  at  the  City  of  Washington 
and  it  was  suggested  "  that  an  informal  consultation 
between  some  person  in  this  country  (the  United 
States)  possessing  knowledge  of  the  questions  in  dis- 
pute and  a  Canadian  similarly  equipped  might  tend 
to  facilitate  the  discovery  of  a  basis  of  agreement 
between  the  United  States  and  Great  Britain  upon 
which  a  practical  boundary  line  could  be  established." 
Accordingly  a  number  of  informal  conferences  were 
held  early  in  1888  at  Washington,  D.  C,  between 
Professor  William  H.  Dall  of  the  United  States 
Geological  Survey  and  Dr.  George  M.  Dawson,  for 
many  years  head  of  the  Dominion  Geological  Survey. 
These  gentlemen,  who  were  acquainted  with  the  gen- 
eral features  of  the  country  through  which  the  line  of 
demarcation  must  pass,  held,  it  appeared  when  they 
talked  the  matter  over,  widely  different  views  as  to 
how  the  frontier  should  be  drawn.  While  Professor 
Dall  thought  that  there  was  not  a  shadow  of  doubt 
that  the  frontier  should  pass  around  the  sinuosities  of 
the  mainland  above  fifty-four  degrees  forty  minutes 
and  thus  at  every  point  shut  off  Canada  from  tide 
water,  Dr.  Dawson  maintained  that  the  line  of  de- 
marcation should  cut  across  most  if  not  all  of  those 
same  sinuosities.  Mr.  Dall  based  his  opinion  on  the 
wording  of  the  Treaty  of  1825  and  the  historical  de- 
velopment of  the  Russian-American  settlements.  Dr. 
Dawson   founded   his   contention    upon   a   mistaken 


DALL   AND    DAWSON.  97 

reading  of  the  same  Treaty.  He  argued  that  where 
the  mountains  failed  to  provide  a  natural  watershed 
within  the  ten  leagues  limit  from  the  shoreline,  the 
coast  from  which  the  ten  leagues  inland  should  be 
measured  was  not  the  shoreline  of  all  the  sinuosities 
that  cut  into  the  mainland,  but  the  outer  edge  of  the 
territorial  waters  of  the  lisiere  ;  and  that  within  those 
territorial  waters  were  included  all  parts  of  the  sinu- 
osities above  the  point  where  they  were  only  two 
leagues  or  less  wide  from  shore  to  shore.  In  ad- 
vancing this  argument  in  support  of  his  contention, 
he  failed  thoroughly  to  comprehend  the  language  of 
the  Treaty.  He  said  in  his  Report  to  Sir  Charles 
Tupper,  a  copy  of  which  he  handed  to  Mr.  Dall, 
that  the  Treaty  of  1825  stipulates: 

"  Que  partout  ou  la  crete  des  montagnes  qui 
s'etendent  dans  une  direction  parallele  a  la  cote  .... 
se  trouverait  a  la  distance  de  dix  lieues  marines  de 
I'ocean  ....  la  limite  ....  sera  formee  par  une  ligne 
parallele  a  la  cote,  et  qui  ne  pourra  jamais  en  etre 
eloignee  que  de  dix  lieues  marines." 

Then  he  went  on  to  say : 

'•  The  word  '  ocean '  is  wholly  inapplicable  to 
inlets ;  consequently  the  line,  whether  marked  by 
mountains  or  only  by  a  survey  line,  has  to  be 
drawn  without  reference  to  inlets. 

"  None  of  the  inlets  between  Portland  Channel  and 
the  Meridian  of  141°  west  longitude  are  six  miles  in 


98  THE    ALASKA    FRONTIER. 

width,  excepting,  perhaps  a  short  part  of  Lynn  Canal ; 
consequently,  with  that  possible  exception,  the  width 
of  territory — on  the  coast  assigned  under  the  Con- 
vention to  Russia — may  not  be  measured  from  any 
point  within  the  mouths  of  the  inlets.  All  the  waters 
within  the  mouths  of  the  inlets  are  as  much  territorial 
waters,  according  to  an  universally  admitted  interna- 
tional law,  as  those  of  a  fresh-water  lake  or  stream 
would  be  under  analogous  circumstances." 

Unfortunately  for  the  strength  of  the  above  argu- 
ment. Dr.  Dawson  failed  to  take  into  account  the 
actual  wording  of  the  Treaty  and  misquoted  it  in 
the  citations  above  given.  For  the  last  sentence 
of  the  Fourth  Article  of  the  Anglo-Muscovite  Treaty 
of  1825  that  Dr.  Dawson  quotes,  reads  not  as  he 
gives  it,  but   as  follows : 

"  Sera  formee  par  une  ligne  parallelle  aux  sinuosi- 
tes  de  la  cote  et  qui  ne  pourra  jamais  en  etre  eloignee 
que  de  dix  lieues  marines." 

When  the  sentence,  "  parallele  aux  sinuosites  de 
la  cote  "  is  written  and  read  as  it  is  actually  in  the 
Treaty,  and  not  as  Dr.  Dawson  wrote  it  to  Sir 
Charles  Tupper,  "parallele  a  la  cote,"  it  is  perfectly 
apparent  that  in  the  Treaty  itself  it  is  expressly 
provided  that  the  frontier  line  shall  never  pass  across 
any  of  the  sinuosities,  but  always  around  them  at 
some  distance   inland.^^ 

"Probably  the  most  important  aid  which  has  been  given  to  the 
crystallization  of  a  public  opinion  in  England  favorable  to  the  Ca- 


ARGUMENT   OF    CANADA.  99 

The  weakness  of  the  Canadian  claims  becomes 
clearly  evident  by  a  comparison  and  examination  of 
the  Canadian  demands  from  their  inception  until  the 
Quebec  Conference.      It  then  becomes  apparent  that 

nadian  myth,  is  the  article  from  the  pen  of  Mr.  Thomas  Hodgins, 
King's  Counsellor,  Master  in  Ordinary  of  the  Supreme  Court 
of  Ontario,  that  appeared  in  the  Contemporary  Review  for 
August,  1902,  The  Alaska- Canada  Boundary  Dispute. 

Mr.  Hodgins  in  his  presentation  of  the  question  entirely  passes 
over  many  vital  facts  at  variance  with  the  Canadian  argument  and 
others  he  states  in  such  a  meagre  way  that  they  have  a  semblance 
of  supporting  the  Canadian  view  of  the  question  instead  of  the 
United  States  side  of  it  as  they  really  do.  He  never  mentions 
any  Canadian  or  English  maps,  evidently  because  they  are 
evidence  against  the  Canadian  contentions.  He  gives  one  or  two 
extracts  from  the  instructions  of  the  British  Government  to  their 
representatives  to  show  that  in  the  negotiations  that  resulted  in 
the  treaty  of  1825,  the  English  plenipotentiary  forced  the  Russian 
diplomats  to  recede  from  the  contention  the  Muscovites  had  made 
originally.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  a  careful  examination  of  the 
whole  correspondence  leading  up  to  that  treaty  clearly  establishes 
the  fact  that  England  was  forced  to  recede  from  one  proposition 
after  another  until  she  finally  agreed  to  the  demand  of  Russia 
that  the  Muscovite  Empire  should  have  on  the  continent  an  un- 
broken lisi^re  including  all  the  sinuosities  in  their  whole  extent 
above  fifty-four  degrees  forty  minutes. 

Mr.  Hodgins  gives  three  short  quotations  from  Count  Nessel- 
rode :  "  Etroite  lisiere  sur  la  cote,^'  ^^  d^une  simple  lisiere  du  con- 
tinent,'^ ^'d'un  mediocre  espace  de  terre  ferme."  He  does  not 
say  in  what  book,  nor  at  what  pages  they  may  be  found.  They 
are  all  three  taken  from  Count  Nesselrode's  letter  to  Count 
Lieven,  the  Russian  Ambassador  to  England,  dated  April  17th, 
1824.  {Fur  Seal  Arditration,  Volume  IV.,  page  399.)  From 
these  short  extracts  Mr.  Hodgins  attempts  to  argue  that  the 
Russians  were  only  fencing  to  retain  so  narrow  a  strip  on 
the  mainland  that  it  would  give  them  merely  the  land  around 


ICX)  THE   ALASKA   FRONTIER. 

the  Canadians  have  advanced  two  separate  and  dis- 
tinct claims  with  a  later  modification  of  one  of  them, 
to  the  territory  that  both  the  Russian  and  the  United 
States  Governments  have  always  openly  contended 

the  mouths  of  the  sinuosities  that  advance  into  the  continent : 
in  other  words,  that  they  would  be  satisfied  with  a  broken 
lisidre.  But  when  those  quotations  are  examined  with  their 
complementary  contexts  in  Count  Nesselrode's  note  to  Count 
Lieven,  it  is  seen  that  the  Russian  Minister  of  Foreign  Affairs 
instructed  the  Russian  Ambassador  at  London  to  make  it 
known  to  the  English  Government  that  Russia  would  never  be 
content  with  less  than  a  strip  or  lisi^re  on  the  continental  shore 
above  fifty-four  forty  of  sufficient  width  to  include  all  the  sinuosities 
in  their  entire  extent.  Count  Nesselrode  distinctly  insisted  that 
the  eastern  frontier  of  the  lisiere  should  be  drawn  along  the  top  of 
the  mountains  that  follow  the  sinuosities  of  the  coast. 

For  example,  the  context  with  which  the  first  of  those  short 
citations  is  connected  is  as  follows.  Speaking  of  the  proposition 
that  Sir  Charles  Bagot  had  made  relative  to  a  frontier,  Count 
Nesselrode  said,  "  that  upon  the  continent  and  towards  the  east, 
this  frontier  could  run  along  the  mountains  that  follow  the  sinu- 
osities (sinuosit6s)  of  the  coast  up  to  Mount  Saint  Elias,  and  that 
from  that  point  up  to  the  Arctic  Ocean  we  would  fix  the  limits  of 
the  respective  possessions  according  to  the  line  of  the  140  degree 
of  longitude  west  from  Greenwich. 

"  In  order  not  to  cut  Prince  of  Wales  Island,  which  according 
to  this  arrangement  should  belong  to  Russia,  we  proposed  to  carry 
the  southern  frontier  of  our  domains  to  the  54°  40'  of  latitude 
and  to  make  it  reach  the  coast  of  the  continent  at  the  Portland 
Canal  whose  mouth  opening  on  the  ocean  is  at  the  height  of 
Prince  of  Wales  Island  and  whose  origin  is  in  the  lands  between 
the  55°  and  56°  of  latitude. 

"This  proposition  only  assured  us  a  narrow  strip  upon  the 
coast  itself,  and  it  left  to  the  English  establishments  all  the  space 
necessary  to  multiply  and  expand." 

The  original  French  text  of  the  above  quotation  is  as  follows  : 
"qu'en  consequence  la  ligne  du  55*  degr6  de  latitude  septentri- 


ARGUMENT   OF    CANADA.  lOI 

was  part  and  parcel  of  Russian  America  or  Alaska. 
The  first  of  the  two  claims  pressed  by  Canada  to 
Alaskan  territory  was  that  the  part  of  the  third 
article  of  the  Anglo-Russian  Treaty  of   1825,  which 

onale,  constitueroit  au  midi  la  fronti^re  des  Etats  de  Sa  Majest6 
Imp^riale,  que  sur  le  continent  et  vers  I'est,  cette  frontiere  pour- 
roit  courir  le  long  des  montagnes  qui  suivent  les  sinuosit^s  de  la 
c6te  jusqu'au  Mont  Elie,  et  que  de  ce  point  jusqu'a  la  Mer 
Glaciate  nous  fixerions  les  bornes  des  possessions  respectives 
d'apr^  la  ligne  du  140*  degr6  de  longitude  ouest  m^ridien  de 
Greenwich. 

' ' Afin  de  ne  pas  couper  1'  He  du  Prince  de  Galles,  qui  selon  cet 
arrangement  devoit  rester  h  la  Russie,  nous  proposions  de  porter 
la  frontiere  m6ridonale  de  nos  domaines  au  54°  40'  de  latitude  et 
de  la  faire  aboutir  sur  le  Continent  au  Portland  Canal,  dont  1' em- 
bouchure dans  r  Oc6an  est  h  la  hauteur  de  1'  He  du  Prince  de  Galles 
et  I'origme  dans  les  terres  entre  le  55°  et  56°  de  latitude. 

' '  Cette  proposition  ne  nous  assuroit  qu'  une  etroite  lisiere  sur 
la  cote  mime,  et  elle  laissoit  aux  Etablissemens  Anglois  tout 
I'espace  n6cessaire  pour  se  multiplier  et  s'6tendre."  {Fur  Seal 
Arbitration,  Volume  IV.,  page  399.) 

The  object  of  the  Russians  in  having  such  a  strip  was  to  pre- 
vent the  English  from  establishing  trading  posts  on  the  mainland 
opposite  the  Russian  islands  which  could  compete  with  the 
Russian  establishments  in  the  quest  for  furs.  Had  the  Russians 
allowed  the  English  to  have  the  upper  part  of  the  sinuosities 
above  fifty  four  forty,  the  Hudson's  Bay  Company  could  have 
established  posts  on  the  upper  reaches  of  the  estuaries  to  com- 
pete with  the  Russian  settlements  on  the  islands. 

In  support  of  the  Canadian  argument  that  the  outward  edge 
of  the  territorial  waters  should  be  used  in  computing  the  ten 
leagues  inland,  Mr.  Hodgins  intercalates  in  the  English  version 
of  several  of  the  articles  which  he  quotes  of  the  treaty  of 
1825  a  few  extracts  from  the  French  original,  but  he  does  not 
place  after  the  word  windings  of  the  English  text,  the  French 
word  sinuosites  of  the  French  version.  The  French  copy  of  the 
treaty  is  the  official  text,  and  the  British  Imperial  Government 


r02  THE    ALASKA    FRONTIER. 

reads,  "La  dite  ligne  remontera  au  nord  le  long  de 
la  passe  dite  Portland  Channel  jusqu'au  point  de 
la  terre  ferme  ou  elle  atteint  le  56*  degre  de  latitude 
Nord,"    did    not   mean    that   body   of    water   which 

has  recognized  it  as  such  ;  and  the  use  of  the  word  sinuosit^s 
gives  a  somewhat  different  meaning  from  the  word  windings. 
The  meaning  of  sinuosity  is  more  accurately  rendered  in  English 
by  the  word  indentation.  The  word  sinuosity  alone  is  proof 
enough  to  overthrow  the  Canadian  argument  in  support  of  meas- 
uring the  ten  leagues  inland  from  the  outer  edge  of  the  territorial 
waters  instead  of  from  the  shores  of  the  sinuosities  of  the  coast. 
As  the  phrase  ' '  parall^le  aux  sinuosit6s  de  la  cote ' '  goes  to  the 
very  heart  of  the  boundary  question,  it  is  certainly  simpler  for  a 
Canadian  to  omit  that  sentence  altogether  and  so  avoid  all  dis- 
cussion of  it. 

In  reference  to  the  case  of  Peter  Martin  in  1876,  Mr.  Hodgins 
fails  to  show  that,  in  the  final  settlement  of  that  incident  between 
the  United  States  Department  of  State  and  the  British  Foreign 
Office,  the  British  and  the  Canadian  Governments  recognized 
that  on  the  Stikine  River,  Canada  did  not  touch  tide  water. 

Mr.  Hodgins  cites  Chief  Justice  Marshall — who  never  heard  of 
the  Alaska  boundary  question — and  other  jurists  of  repute  to 
show  that  the  United  States  in  this  dispute  are  acting  in  a 
wrong  and  immoral  way.  For  instance,  he  quotes  two  extracts 
from  ex-President  Cleveland.  {^The  Century,  New  Series,  Vol- 
ume XL.,  1901,  pages  283  and  290.)  An  examination  of  these 
passages  shows  that  in  them  Mr.  Cleveland  did  not  condemn  the 
international  morality  of  the  United  States  either  generally  or 
in  this  particular  instance,  but  on  the  contrary  sharply  attacked 
the  policy  of  Lord  Salisbury  towards  Venezuela. 

Mr.  Hodgins  states  that  ' '  the  free  navigation  of  the  waters  in 
the  strip  of  coast  was  proffered ' '  and  he  quotes  from  the  Russian 
Plenipotentiaries  to  prove  his  point.  When,  however,  the  note 
"  Observations  of  Russian  Plenipotentiaries  on  Sir  C.  Bagot's 
Amended  Proposal ' '  {Fur  Seal  Arbitration,  Volume  IV. ,  pages 
428-429)  is  read  in  full,  it  is  evident  in  the  first  place  that  the 
Russians  meant  rivers,  not  waters,  since  the  word   they   used 


PORTLAND    CHANNEL.  I03 

Vancouver  had  named  Portland  Channel  or  Canal, 
but  several  other  stretches  of  water  a  long  dis- 
tance away  known  severally  as  Duke  of  Clarence 
Strait  and  Behm's  Canal  or  Channel  and  Burrough's 

is  Jleuves,  and  in  the  second  place  the  note  shows  also  that 
the  Russians  wished  an  unbroken,  continuous  strip  on  the 
mainland. 

Mr.  Hodgins  also  cites  a  passage  from  Secretary  Blaine  {Fur 
Seal  Arbitration,  Volume  II.,  page  273)  in  support  of  the  claim 
that  Canada  now  makes  to  the  upper  part  of  the  sinuosities  such 
as  the  Lynn  Canal.  But  the  quotation  from  Mr.  Blaine  does  not 
support  the  Canadian  contentions,  for  Mr.  Blaine  in  no  way  gives 
up  our  right  to  the  whole  of  the  Lynn  Canal  and  the  envelop- 
ing strip  of  land  on  the  continent.  What  Mr.  Blaine  does  say 
is  that  which  is  specially  provided  for  in  the  treaty  of  1825,  that 
all  rivers  which  take  their  rise  in  Canadian  territory  and  then 
flow  through  the  Russian  or  American  lisi^re,  shall  be  open  to 
the  Canadians  for  navigation.  For  example,  the  Stikine  River 
takes  its  rise  in  Canadian  territory,  and  passing  through  the 
American  strip  of  land,  empties  into  the  sea  near  Fort  Wrangell. 
In  so  far  as  the  Stikine  is  navigable,  the  Canadians  have  the 
right  of  through  navigation,  just  as  the  Rhine  and  the  Danube 
are  open  to  the  international  navigation  of  the  several  adjoining 
powers. 

In  addition  Mr.  Hodgins  makes  the  following  remarkable 
statement :  '  *  The  United  States  have  acquired  their  present 
great  territorial  domain  partly  by  Revolution  and  partly  by  the 
voluntary  gift  of  Canadian  territory  from  Great  Britain  ;  by  pur- 
chase from  France,  Spain  and  Russia ;  and  by  conquest  from 
Mexico  and  Spain .  Under  what  guileless  title  should  be  placed 
their  unsanctioned  appropriation  of  the  Canadian  Naboth's  vine- 
yard, on  the  British  side  of  the  boundary  line  ?  Perhaps  as  an 
American  sequel  to  the  Fashoda  incident."  In  a  note  Mr. 
Hodgins  says  that  the  "  gift  was  that  part  of  old  French  Canada 
now  the  States  of  Ohio,  Indiana,  Illinois,  Michigan,  Wisconsin, 
and  Minnesota,  comprising  about  300,000  square  miles  of  Cana- 
dian territory  ceded  by  France  to  Great  Britain  in  1763." 


I04  THE    ALASKA    FRONTIER. 

Bay.  And  that  consequently  the  frontier  line  should 
not  be  drawn  eastward  from  the  southern  end  of 
Prince  of  Wales  Island  through  Dixon's  Entrance 
and  then  up  the  estuary  that  opens  at  that  point  into 
the  ocean  as  the  Russian  and  the  United  States  and 
the  great  majority  of  English  and  Canadian  and  other 
cartographers  have  marked  it,  but  northward  up  part 
of  Duke  of  Clarence  Straits  and  then  north-eastward 
along  Behm's  Canal  to  Burrough's  Bay  and  then 
overland  in  a  generally  northward  and  north-westerly 
direction.  Besides,  it  is  a  fact  that  that  body  of  water 
which  the  United  States  have  and  do  claim  is  "  Port- 
land Channel "  or  '*  Canal  "  has  been  so  marked  on 
several  official  Canadian  and  English  maps,  as  for  in- 
stance a  map  of  the  "  Northwestern  part  of  the  Do- 
minion of  Canada,"  which  was  published  by  the  Sur- 
veyor-General at  Ottawa  in  1898.  In  addition,  upon 
a  number  of  these  maps,  the  generic  names  "chan- 
nel "  and  "  canal "  are  used  interchangeably  to 
denote  bodies  of  water  of  a  similar  formation  or 
nature.  This  is  notably  the  case  on  the  British 
"Admiralty  Chart  No.  787,"  published  in  1877, 
and  reissued  at  intervals  with  corrections  up  to 
1898  (see  Map  No.  22)  and  again  in  1901  (see 
Map  No.  i),  which  gives  "Portland  Canal"  and 
"Lynn  Chan."«^ 

""Admiralty  Chart  No.  787  was  first  issued  in  1877  and  re- 
issued with  corrections  in  June  1885,  Dec.  1886,  March  1889, 
July  1889,   Dec.  1889,  June  1890,  March  1891,  Sept   1891,  Nov 


,»S«^      fralmiJt  r 


British  Admiralty  Chart,  Published  June  2ist,  1877,  under  the  Superintendence  of 
Captain  F.  J.  Evans,  R.  N.,  Hvdrographkr,  and  Corrected  to  April,  1898. 


MAP  No.    22, 


I06  THE    ALASKA    FRONTIER. 

Unfortunately,  too,  for  the  adroit  Canadian  argu- 
ment that  the  "Portland  Channel  "  and  the  "Portland 
Canal  "  cannot  possibly  mean  the  same  estuary,  it  is 
conclusively  proved  by  comparing  the  English  texts 
and  the  authorized  French  translation  of  Vancouver's 
Voyages  that  the  name  of  "  Portland  Channel  "  and 
the  "Portland  Canal"  mean  one  and  the  same  iden- 
tical body  of  water. 

In  the  English  originals  of  Vancouver's  Voyages 
the  text  reads : 

"  In  the  forenoon  we  reached  that  arm  of  the  sea, 
whose  examination  had  occupied  our  time  from  the 
27th  of  the  preceding  to  the  2d.  of  this  month.  The 
distance  from  its  entrance  to  its  source  is  about  70 
miles ;  which,  in  honor  of  the  noble  family  of  Ben- 
tinck,  I   named   Portland's  Canal."" 

Again,  in  the  edition  of  1801,  the  text  runs  thus: 

"  In  the  forenoon  we  reached  that  arm  of  the  sea, 
whose  examination  had  occupied  our  time  from  the 
27th  of  the  preceding  to  the  2d  of  this  month.  The 
distance  from  its  entrance  to  its  source  is  about 
70  miles ;  which,  in  honor  of  the  noble  family  of 
Bentinck,  I  named  Portland's  Channel."  ^^ 

1891,  Oct.  1892,  June  1893,  March  1894,  Oct.  1894,  I^ec.  1894, 
April  1895,  January  1898,  April  1898,  August  1901. 

*M  Voyage  of  Discovery,  by  Captain  George  Vancouver: 
London,  1798,  Volume  II.,  page  371. 

'*  A  Voyage  of  Discovery  to  the  North  Pacific  Ocean,  and 
Round  the  World  *  *  *  under  the  command  of  Captain 
George  Vancouver:  London  1801,  Volume  IV.,  page  191. 
(Academy  of  Natural  Sciences,  Philadelphia.) 


PORTLAND   channel:    VANCOUVER  S    TEXTS.         IO7 

The  French  translation  published  at  Paris  at  about 
the  same  time  reads  thus  : 

"  L'apres-midi,  nous  atteignimes  le  bras  de  mer, 
dont  la  reconnaissance  nous  avait  occupes,  depuis  le 
27  juillet,  jusqu'au  2  de  ce  mois.  La  distance  de 
son  entree  a  son  extremite  interieure  est  d'environ 
70  milles.  Je  I'ai  nomme  Canal-de-Portland,  en 
I'honneur  de  la  famille  de  Bentinck."^ 

Also  in  the  drafts  and  counter  drafts  that  passed 
between  Sir  Charles  Bagot  and  Count  Nesselrode  in 
their  efforts  to  agree  upon  a  boundary  line,  the  names 
"  Portland  Canal  "  and  "  Portland  Channel  "  are  used 
interchangeably.  ^ 

To-day,  partly  because  on  many  maps  the  name 
Portland  Canal  is  given  and  partly  because  the  "wish 
is  father  to  the  thought"  some  Canadians  would  have 
the  world  believe  that  Count  Nesselrode,  Monsieur 
de  Poletica  and  Mr.  Stratford  Canning  when  they  in- 
serted the  name  "  Portland  Channel "  in  the  treaty  of 
1825  did  not  mean  that  body  of  water  that  Vancouver 
had  named  Portland  Channel,  but  that  they  intended 
to  designate  thereby  some  other  stretch  of  water.^ 

**  Voyage  de  Decouveries,  d  r  Ocean  Pacifique  du  Nordet  Autour 
du  Monde  *  *  *  par  le  capitaine  George  Vancouver  :  traduit 
de  r anglais  par  P.  F.  Henry:  A  Paris,  de  I'lmprimerie  de  Didot 
Jeune,  an  X.,  Volume  III.,  page  370.  (Academy  of  Natural 
Sciences,  Philadelphia.) 

*^  Fur  Seal  Arbitration,  Volume  IV.,  pages  427-430. 

**  On  this  point  see  a  letter  by  Mr.  Arthur  Johnston  in  the  New- 
York  Nation,  January  23d,  1902,  and  a  reply  to  it  by  Professor 


I08  THE   ALASKA   FRONTIER. 

And  yet  the  negotiators  of  the  treaty  of  1825  knew 
of  Vancouver's  charts,  and  so  of  his  voyages  of 
discovery.  This  first  claim  by  Canada  to  United 
States  territory  is  thus  thoroughly  well  met  by  the 
work  of  the  discoverer  and  the  name  given  by  him 
to  the  Portland  Channel,  even  had  not  the  British 
Imperial  Government  in  its  formal  demand  at  the 
Quebec  Conference  to  the  United  States,  for  what 
is  clearly  the  latter  s  domain,  acknowledged  that 
the  United  States  contention  as  to  what  is  the 
Portland  Channel  is  right. 

In  addition,  the  debates  of  the  Dominion  Parlia- 
ment show  that  Sir  Wilfred  Laurier,  the  Premier  of 
Canada,  himself  acknowledged  the  unsoundness  of 
the  British  Columbian  claim  as  to  what  body  of  water 
Count  Nesselrode  and  Sir  Stratford  Canning  meant 
by  inserting  in  the  Anglo-Muscovite  treaty  of  1825 
the  name  "Portland  Channel."  Colonel  Prior,  mem- 
ber in  the  Dominion  Parliament  for  Victoria,  British 
Columbia,  asked  in  the  spring  of  1901  the  Govern- 
ment a  number  of  questions  and  obtained  replies 
as  follows : — 

The  Hon.  E.  G.  Prior  (member  for  Victoria, 
B.  C.),««said: 

"  Before  the  Orders  of  the  Day  are  called,  I  would 

William  H.  Dall  of  the  Smithsonian  Institution,  in  the  Nation, 
January  30th. 

®*  Debates  of  the  House  of  Commons,  Sessions  of  igoi :  Vol. 
LV.,  page  4407 — The  Alaskan  Boundary. 


PORTLAND    CHANNEL  :     PRIOR   AND    LAURIER.        IO9 

ask  the  right  hen.  leader  of  the  House  to  give  his 
attention  to  some  correspondence  I  have  received 
concerning  the  Alaskan  boundary  dispute.  *  *  * 
Last  year  I  asked  in  the  House  : 

"  'Has  the  large  map  of  the  Dominion,  which  was 
latterly  exposed  to  view  in  the  vestibule  of  this  build- 
ing, been  sent  to  the  Paris  exhibition  as  an  official 
map  of  Canada  exhibited  by  the  Government  ? 

"  *  Is  it  true  that  the  boundary  between  Canada  and 
Alaska,  commonly  known  as  the  'Alaska  Boundary,' 
is  marked  on  that  map  according  to  the  United  States 
contention,  and  that  the  boundary  according  to  the 
Canadian,  or  British  Columbia,  contention,  is  not 
•  shown  at  all  ? ' 

"To  this  question,  the  Hon.  the  Minister  of  Agri- 
culture replied: 

"  'The  map  in  question  was  sent  to  Paris  as  one  of 
the  exhibits  of  the  Department  of  Public  Work,  but 
not  as  an  official  map.  It  is  true  that  the  boundary 
between  Canada  and  Alaska,  commonly  known  as 
the  'Alaska  Boundary'  is  marked  on  that  map  in  two 
ways,  marking  the  American  contention  and  the 
Canadian  contentions  as  to  the  boundary,  and  each 
of  those  markings  is  distinctly  stated  to  be  what  it 
represents,  so  that  I  do  not  think  there  can  be  any 
possible  difficulty  or  doubt  as  to  what  is  meant.'  " 

Colonel  Prior  continued : — "  Last  year  I  wrote  to 
Mr.  Begg,  who  has  taken  a  great  deal  of  interest  in 
this  question,  and  we  both  wrote   to   Mr.  Brymner, 


no  THE   ALASKA   FRONTIER. 

who  was  then  in  Paris,  asking  him  to  go  to  the  ex- 
position and  examine  the  map.  I  have  not  got  Mr. 
Brymner's  answer  to  myself,  as  I  unfortunately  left 
it  at  home,  but  I  have  a  letter  here  from  Mr.  Begg 
on  the  same  subject,  dated  17th  April  1901  : — 

"  *  I  have  been  looking  over  the  letter  sent  to  me  by 
Mr.  Brymner  of  Paris,  who  visited  the  exhibition  at 
your  request,  and  mine,  to  see  if  it  was  as  repre- 
sented— one  provisional  boundary  for  British  Colum- 
bia and  another  for  United  States.  In  his  letter  to 
me  dated  July  17th,  1900,  he  says  : — "  I  had  your  note 
re  the  frontier  question,  also  a  letter  from  Col.  Prior, 
House  of  Commons,  Ottawa,  asking  me  to  go  and 
see  if  it  was  really  as  you  stated,  that  the  boundary 
marked  ran  up  Portland  Canal,  and  not  up  Clarence 
Sound,  and  if  two  boundaries  were  given  and  marked 
'  provisional.'  There  is  but  one  boundary  marked, 
and  that  is  the  one  claimed  by  the  United  States,  and 
there  is  absolutely  no  mention  made  of  its  being  pro- 
visional. There  is  no  distinct  colour  between  Amer- 
ican and  Canadian  territory,  so  it  is  very  difficult  to 
trace  the  line,  the  area  being  so  great  (covered  by  the 
map)  that  nearly  all  the  names  have  been  left  out,  so 
that  neither  Portland  Canal  nor  Clarence  Sound  are 
mentioned,  Wrangel  being  the  only  name  given  in 
that  neighbourhood.  My  object  in  alluding  to  this 
matter  now  is  that  this  map  may  be  sent  to  the  Glas- 
gow exhibition,  and  it  would  be  well  to  know  if  the 
erroneous  boundary  is  marked  running  up  Portland 


PORTLAND    CHANNEL  :     PRIOR    AND    LAURIER.        Ill 

Canal,  and  if  the  British  Columbian  provisional 
boundary  along  Clarence  Straits,  as  shown  on  Brit- 
ish Columbian  maps,  is  entirely  left  out.' 

"  '  Mr.  Brymner's  statement  is  undoubtedly  correct, 
and  it  agrees  with  what  I  supposed  were  the  facts  of 
the  case.' " 

Colonel  Prior  then  said  : 

"  Of  course,  I  have  not  seen  the  map  myself,  but  if 
Mr.  Brymner's  statement,  both  to  Mr.  Begg  and 
myself  be  correct,  namely,  that  the  only  boundary 
marked  on  the  map  is  that  which  the  Americans  con- 
tend for,  the  Government  is  greatly  to  blame  for 
having  allowed  such  a  map  to  be  put  on  exhibit. 
No  doubt  if  on  this  map  only  the  American  conten- 
tion is  shown,  that  will  be  brought  in  as  an  argument 
in  favour  of  the  United  States  whenever  the  matter 
goes  to  arbitration. 

"  I  would  ask  my  right  hon.  friend  whether  he  will 
find  out  if  it  be  true  that  the  American  boundary  is 
the  only  one  indicated  on  this  map,  or  whether  there 
are  two  distinct  boundaries  marked  on  it  and  both 
stated  plainly  to  be  provisional?" 

The  Prime  Minister,  the  Rt.  Hon.  Sir  Wilfred 
Laurier,  replied  to  Colonel  Prior: — "I  shall  call  the 
attention  of  my  colleague  the  Minister  of  Agriculture 
to  the  representations  of  my  hon.  friend.  I  may  say, 
however,  that  in  view  of  the  advice  we  have  received 
from  our  law  offices,  it  is  very  hard  to  maintain  that 
the  boundary  runs  up  Clarence  channel.    The  treaty 


112  THE    ALASKA    FRONTIER. 

says  in  so  many  words  the  Portland  canal,  but  there 
is  a  difference  in  opinion  between  the  Americans  and 
ourselves  as  to  where  that  channel  is.  We  claim  that 
it  is  west  of  Pearse  Island.  They  claim  that  it  is  Ob- 
servatory Inlet.  As  to  endeavouring  to  have  the  line 
pass  along  Clarence  channel,  which  is  a  pretention 
Mr.  Begg  has  often  submitted  to  me,  I  do  not  think 
any  one,  who  will  take  a  careful  view  of  the  matter, 
can  be  convinced  of  the  correctness  of  that  preten- 
tion. The  point  on  which  we  and  the  Americans  do 
not  agree,  is  as  to  what  is  Portland  channel.  They 
want  to  make  it  run  up  Observatory  Inlet  and  then 
to  the  west,  making  out  that  Observatory  Inlet  is  only 
a  small  inlet  running  into  the  interior.  We,  on  the 
other  hand,  contend  that  Portland  channel  is  as  it 
is  described  on  the  map  of  Vancouver  on  which  the 
treaty  of  1825  seems  to  have  been  based,  namely, 
all  that  channel  of  water  which  runs  west  of  Pearse 
Island." '' 

*^  Mr.  Alexander  Begg,  '  *  author  of  the  History  of  British 
Columbia,"  reprinted  at  Victoria,  British  Columbia,  from  the 
British  Columbian  Mining  Record  for  June,  July  and  August, 
1900,  an  article  entitled,  Review  of  the  Alaskan  Boundary  Ques- 
tion. Mr.  Begg  also  contributed  to  the  Scottish  Geographical 
Magazine  for  January  and  February,  1901,  very  much  the  same 
article  under  the  title  of  Review  of  the  Alaskan  Boundary  Ques- 
tion. In  these  two  papers,  Mr.  Begg  devoted  much  space  to  show 
that  the  Portland  Channel  and  the  Portland  Canal  were  separate 
and  distinct  bodies  of  water.  The  replies  of  Sir  Wilfred  Laurier 
to  Colonel  Prior  on  that  subject  thoroughly  answer  that  part  of 
the  Canadian  claim,   except  that  the  Canadian  Premier  was  in 


PORTLAND    CHANNEL  :     PRIOR    AND    LAURIER.        I  1 3 

Colonel  Prior  then  remarked  : — "  I  do  not  think 
that  this  has  anything  to  do  with  the  question  whether 
the  map  is  wrongly  marked.  Whatever  boundary  is 
described  on  it,  should  be  marked  provisional." 

To  this  comment  Sir  Wilfred  Laurier  answered  : — 
"  The  only  provisional  line  we  have  agreed  upon  is 

error  in  claiming  that  the  opening  of  the  Portland  Channel  into 
the  ocean  lay  north  instead  of  south  of  Wales  and  Pearse  Islands. 

Mr.  Begg  also  has  something  to  say  about  the  negotiations  pre- 
vious to  the  treaty,  but  he  does  not  refer  to  many  vital  passages 
that  show  that  the  English  negotiators — first  Sir  Charles  Bagot 
and  afterwards  Sir  Stratford  Canning — had  to  concede  one  point 
after  another,  until  they  finally  agreed  to  the  original  proposition 
of  the  Muscovite  negotiators  that  Russia  should  have  a  lisi^re  on 
the  mainland  above  fifty-four  forty  expressly  to  shut  off"  England 
from  access  to  the  sea  at  all  points  north  of  the  Portland  Canal. 

In  spite  of  Sir  Wilfred  Laurier' s  statement  in  the  spring  of 
1901  in  the  Dominion  Parliament  that  Mr.  Begg's  contention  of 
running  the  frontier  line  north  instead  of  east  from  Cape  Chacon, 
which  is  at  the  southern  extremity  of  Prince  of  Wales  Island, 
was  untenable,  Mr.  Begg  appears  to  stand  by  his  former  as- 
sertions in  the  following  letter  which  appeared  in  the  Colonist 
of  Victoria,  British  Columbia,  December  4th,  1902.  The  able 
and  forcible  letter  of  Mr.  Seward  to  which  Mr.  Begg  refers  will 
be  found  in  note  108  on  page  175. 

"THE   ALASKAN   BOUNDARY. 
"Sir:— 

' '  Two  mighty  men  of  war  liave  recently  appeared  to  bolster 
up  the  forlorn  hope  of  the  boundary  question.  One  is  a  Phila- 
delphia lawyer,  of  some  note,  judging  from  the  numerous  spread- 
eagle  titles  attached  to  his  name  in  a  book  called  '  The  Alasko- 
Canadian  Frontier' — the  titles  are  as  follows  :  '  Book,  by  Thomas 
Willing  Balch,  A.  B.  (Harvard),  Member  of  the  Philadelphia 
Bar ;  the  American  Philosophical  Society  ;  the  American  Histori- 
cal Association,  etc.  ;   Author  of  the  Brooke  Family  of  Whit- 


114  THE   ALASKA   FRONTIER. 

around  Lynn  canal,  and  if  my  hon.  friend  will  look 
carefully  at  the  relief  map  which  is  exhibited  in  the 
library,  he  will  see  that  that  is  the  only  provisional 
line  we  have  agreed  to." 

/^But  as  is  seen  from  Sir  Wilfred  Laurier's  answers 
\o  Colonel  Prior,  acknowledging  the  untenableness 

church,  Hampshire,  England,'  etc.  The  paper  was  read  at  the 
annual  meeting  of  the  Franklin  Institute,  January  15th,  1902. 

"Mr.  Balch  quotes  a  portion  of  the  Treaty  of  1825,  but  he 
does  not  apply  it  in  the  least  degree  in  the  book  he  has  published. 
Without  referring  to  the  Treaty  in  his  arguments  the  controversy 
is  futile,  and  I  take  leave  of  Mr.  Balch  and  his  beautiful  printed 
brochure. 

' '  The  other  warlike  hero  who  comes  forward,  is  plain  Frederick 
W.  Seward,  heralded  as  the  '  son  of  the  great  War  Secretary, 
who  negotiated  the  purchase  of  Alaska.*  Young  Mr.  Seward,  in 
a  recent  letter  to  the  JVew  York  Tribune^  tells  us  that  he  visited 
Alaska  last  summer,  and  discussed  the  claim  put  forward  by  Can- 
ada, as  a  monstrous  one,  without  a  shadow  of  foundation.  But 
if  Mr.  Seward  will  '  trot  out  the  Treaty '  in  connection  with  an 
honest,  unbiased  tribunal,  without  any  subterfuge,  Canada  will  be 
found  quite  willing  and  ready  to  submit  the  question.  Let  us  be 
judged  by  the  Treaty  and  no  subterfuge.  Mr.  Seward  concludes 
his  remarks  by  stating  *  the  only  thing  which  is  open  to  discussion 
or  which  requires  settlement  in  connection  with  the  Alaskan  bound- 
ary, is  its  delineation  in  place,  on  a  line  corresponding  in  all  essen- 
tials with  the  line  which  has  been  recognized  since  the  boundary 
was  first  defined  by  treaty  between  the  government  of  Russia  and 
Great  Britain.  When  Canada  is  prepared  to  have  this  done,' 
says  he,  '  the  United  States  will  cheerfully  co-operate  in  the  work. 
There  is  no  Alaska  boundary  question  in  any  respect,  save  this.' 
What  about  running  east  from  Cape  Chacon,  instead  of  norths 
according  to  the  Treaty  ? 

"ALEXANDER  BEGG. 

"December  2nd,  1902." 


ENGLISH    AND   CANADIAN    MAPS.  II 5 

of  the  contention  that  the  Portland  Channel  and  the 
Portland  Canal  were  not  one  and  the  same  sinuosity, 
the  Canadian  Premier  did  approve  the  claim  that  Can- 
ada advanced  at  the  Quebec  Conference  in  1898  that 
the  opening  of  the  Portland  Channel  into  the  ocean 
was  not  through  the  natural  thalweg  that  flows  be- 
tween Port  Simpson  on  the  south  and  Pearse  and 
Wales  Islands  on  the  north,  but  through  a  much 
narrower  and  practically  unnavigable  channel  to  the 
north  of  these  two  islands. 

On  many  maps,  including  Canadian  and  English 
maps,  the  line  was  drawn  to  the  south  of  Wales  and 
Pearse  Islands.  For  instance,  Arrowsmith,  on  his  map 
issued  in  1864,  marked  the  line  south  of  Wales  and 
Pearse  Islands.  (See  Map  No.  16.)  The  Canadians 
on  an  official  Government  map  of  the  **  Railways  of 
Canada,"  published  in  the  year  1884,  distinctly  drew 
the  frontier  through  the  passage  of  water  south  of 
Wales  and  Pearse  Islands,  and  this  channel  is 
marked  on  that  map  "  Portland  Inlet."  (See  Map 
No.  27.)  These  maps  locate  this  part  of  the  frontier 
in  opposition  to  the  British  claims  by  the  evidence  of 
their  own  cartographers.  Furthermore,  the  opening 
of  Portland  Channel  into  Dixon's  Entrance  is  shown 
by  two  official  maps  of  the  British  Government. 
Chart  number  2431  of  the  British  Admiralty,  pub- 
lished on  the  13th  of  July,  1865,  corrected  to  Feb- 
ruary, 1 90 1,  on  which  Observatory  Inlet  is  marked 
according  to  "Staff  Cpmrnr.  Pender's  Survey,  1868," 


British  Admiralty  Chart,  No.  2458,  published  December  15TH,  1896,  and  corrected 
TO  March,  1900 :  prepared  under  the  direction  of  Rear  Admiral  Wharton. 

MAP  No.   23. 


ENGLISH    AND    CANADIAN    MAPS.  II7 

gives  the  north  west  coast  of  America  from  Port 
Simpson  to  Cross  Sound.  Chart  number  2458  of 
the  British  Admiralty,  published  on  the  15th  of  De- 
cember, 1896,  corrected  to  March,  1900,  shows  the 
coast  line  about  Port  Simpson  and  the  inner  chan- 
nels opposite  Prince  of  Wales  Island.  (See  Map 
No.  23.)  On  both  these  charts  the  passage  of 
water  south  of  Pearse  and  Wales  Islands  opening 
into  Dixon's  Entrance  is  marked  "  Portland  Inlet," 
and  the  channel  to  the  north  of  Pearse  and  Wales 
Islands  is  marked  "Pearse  Canal." 

But  in  addition,  it  is  a  rule  of  International  Law 
that  where  a  water  boundary  is  a  frontier  between 
two  States,  unless  it  is  expressly  otherwise  pro- 
vided the  line  of  demarcation  between  these  two 
powers  shall  pass  through  the  deepest  part  of  the 
water  area,  that  is  through  the  thalweg.  The  word 
thalweg  itself  literally  means,  the  way  through  the 
valley,  that  is  through  the  deepest  part  of  the 
channel.^ 

As  far  back  as  1625,  the  great  Huig  van  Groot, 
or  Grotius,  approved  the  rule  that  where  a  river 
was  the  boundary  between  two  peoples,  the  frontier 
was  understood,  unless  otherwise  provided  for,  to  run 
along  the  middle  of  the  stream.     He  said  : 

^  Concerning  the  historic  development  of  the  rule  of  the 
Thalweg,  see  the  article  of  Judge  Ernest  Nys  of  Brussels  in  the 
Revue  de  Droit  International  (Bruxelles,  1901,  page  75)  entitled, 
' '  Rivieres  et  fleuves  fronti^res — La  Ligne  M6diane  et  le  Thalweg 
— un  Aper9U  historique." 


Il8  THE   ALASKA   FRONTIER, 

"  In  land  defined  by  a  river,  its  natural  boundary,  if 
the  river  changes  its  course  gradually,  it  changes  also 
the  boundary  of  the  territory ;  and  whatever  the  river 
adds  to  one  side  belongs  to  him  to  whose  land  it  is 
added  ;  because  each  people  must  be  supposed  to 
have  settled  their  claims  on  the  understanding  that 
the  river,  as  a  natural  terminus,  should  divide  them 
by  a  line  drawn  along  its  middle.  So  Tacitus  speaks 
of  the  Rhine  as  a  boundary,  so  Diodorus  of  another 
river;  and  Xenophon  calls  such  a  river  simply  the 
Horizont,  the  boundary."  ^® 

In  recent  years,  William  Edward  Hall,  an  Eng- 
lish Barrister,  in  his  Treatise  of  International  Law, 
says: 

"  Where  it  [a  boundary  or  frontier]  follows  a  river, 
and  it  is  not  proved  that  either  of  the  riparian  states 
possesses  a  good  title  to  the  whole  bed,  their  territo- 
ries are  separated  by  a  line  running  down  the  middle, 
except  where  the  stream  is  navigable,  in  which  case 


*' "  In  arcifiniis  flumen  mutato  paulatim  cursu  mutat  et  terri- 
torii  fines,  et  quicquid  flumen  parti  alteri  adjacit,  sub  ejus  imperio 
est,  cui  adjectum  est :  quia  scilicet  eo  animo  populus  uterque  im- 
perium  occupasse  primitus  creditur,  ut  flumen  sui  medietate  eos 
dirimeret,  tanquam  naturalis  terminus.  Tacitus  dixit :  Cerium 
jam  alveo  Rhenum,  quique  terminus  esse  sufficiat.  Diodorus 
Siculus,  ubi  controversiam  narrat,  quae  inter  Egestanos  et  Seli- 
nuntios  fuit,  ■Trorauov,  ait,  T^  x^P'^'"  ipi^ovTog,  amne  fines  discrimi- 
nante.  Et  Xenophon  talem  amnem  simpliciter  rhv  Spi^ovra,  id  est, 
finitorem,  vocat."    De  Jure  Belli  ac  Pacis :  Lib.  II.,  Cap.  III., 

XVI.,  2. 


PORTLAND    channel:    THE   THALWEG.  II9 

the  centre  of  the  deepest  channel,  or,  as  it  is 
usually  called,  the  Thalweg,  is  taken  as  the  bound- 
ary."^" 

The  Swiss,  Alphonse  Rivier,  for  many  years  and  at 
the  time  of  his  death,  Consul-General  of  his  country 
to  Belgium,  in  his  Treatise,  Principes  du  Droit  Des 
GenSy  says : 

"When  a  water  course  is  a  frontier,  the  bed  can 
be  entirely  in  one  of  the  territories  [adjoining],  the 
frontier  following  one  of  the  banks. 

«  4t  4s  ^  4:  ^ 

'*  This  frontier  must  be  proved,  it  is  not  presumed. 
In  case  of  doubt,  the  frontier  line  shall  be  the  middle 
of  the  bed.  Such  at  least  is  the  ancient  rule,  still  in 
vigor  as  a  general  rule  for  non  navigable  water 
courses,  simple  brooks,  while  it  is  absolute  (deroge) 
for  rivers  and  streams  owing  to  a  more  and  more 
constant  usage,  which  numerous  treaties  have  sanc- 
tioned for  almost  a  century.  According  to  this  cus- 
tom, the  limit  is  in  the  middle,  not  of  the  bed  but  of 
the  current  or  thread  of  water,  which  is  called  to-day 
the  Thalweg,  a  German  word  which  signifies  chemin 
du  valy  in  English  mid-channel.  This  system  has  the 
advantage  of  giving  to  the  two  countries  equal  facili- 
ties to  use  the  water  course ;  besides,  the  thalweg, 
although  variable  owing  to  the  continuous  action  of 

'"Fourth  edition,  Oxford,  1895,  page  127;  this  edition  was 
printed  after  Mr.  Hall's  death,  but  the  first  two  hundred  and 
seventy-two  pages  were  already  in  type  when  he  died. 


I20  THE    ALASKA   FRONTIER. 

the  running  water,  is  less  so,  however,  than  the  me- 
dian line."'^ 

Halleck,  an  American,  in  his  International  Law, 
says :  '^^ 

"Where  a  navigable  river  forms  the  boundary  of 
conterminous  states,  the  middle  of  the  channel — the 
filunt  aquae  or  thalweg — is  generally  taken  as  the 
line  of  their  separation,  the  presumption  of  law  being 
that  the  right  of  navigation  is  common  to  them  both. 
But  this  presumption  may  be  rebutted  or  destroyed 
by  actual  proof  of  the  exclusive  title  of  one  of  the  ri- 
parian proprietors  to  the  entire  river.  Such  tide  may 
have   been   acquired   by  prior  occupancy,  purchase, 

"  "  Lorsq'un  cours  d'eau  forme  fronti^re,  le  lit  peut  Stre  en  en- 
tier  sur  I'un  des  territoires,  la  frontiere  suivant  Tun  des  bords. 

' '  Cette  frontiere  doit  &tre  prouvee  ;  on  ne  la  presume  pas.  En 
cas  de  doute,  la  ligne  frontiere  serait  le  milieu  du  lit.  Telle  est  du 
moins  la  r^gle  ancienne,  encore  en  vigueur  comme  r^gle  g6n6rale 
pour  les  cours  d'eau  non  navigables,  les  simples  ruisseaux,  tandis 
qu'il  y  est  d^rog^  pour  les  fleuves  et  rivieres  par  un  usage  de  plus 
en  plus  constant,  que  des  trait6s  nombreux  ont  sanctionn6  depuis 
pr^s  d'un  si^cle.  D'apr^  cet  usage,  la  limite  est  au  milieu,  non 
du  lit,  mais  du  courant  ou  fil  de  I'eau,  qu'onappelle  aujourd'hui  le 
thalweg,  mot  allemand  qui  signifie  chemin  du  val ;  en  anglais 
mid-channel.  Ce  systeme  a  Tavantage  de  donner  aux  deux  pays 
limitrophes  des  facilit^s  6gales  pour  utiliser  le  cours  d'eau ;  en 
outre,  le  thalweg,  tout  variable  qu'il  est  en  suite  de  Taction  con- 
tinue de  I'eau  courante,  Test  cependant  moins  que  la  ligne  m6- 
diane. '  *  Principes  du  Droit  des  Gens  par  Alphonse  Rivier.  Paris, 
1896,  Volume  I.,  pages  167-168. 

"  Halleck* s  International  Law:  Third  edition  revised  by  Sir 
Sherston  Baker,  Bart.,  of  Lincoln's  Inn  and  Barrister-at-Law, 
London,   1893,  Volume  L,  page  171. 


f 


«S!-i/ 


PORTLAND   channel:    THE   THALWEG.  121 

cession,  treaty,  or  any  of  the  modes  by  which  other 
public  territory  may  be  acquired.  But  where  the 
river  not  only  separates  the  conterminous  states,  but 
also  their  territorial  jurisdictions,  the  thalweg,  or 
middle  current,  forms  the  line  of  separation  through 
the  bays  and  estuaries  through  which  the  waters  of 
the  river  flow  into  the  sea.  As  a  general  rule,  this 
line  runs  through  the  middle  of  the  deepest  channel, 
although  it  may  divide  the  river  and  its  estuaries  into 
two  very  unequal  parts.  But  the  deeper  channel 
may  be  less  suited,  or  totally  unfit,  for  the  purposes 
of  navigation,  in  which  case  the  dividing  line  would 
be  in  the  middle  of  the  one  best  suited  and  ordi- 
narily used  for  that  object.  The  division  of  the 
islands  in  the  river  and  its  bays  would  follow  the 
same  rule." 

Bluntschli,  a  Swiss,  who  for  many  years  taught  the 
Laws  of  Nations  at  the  University  of  Heidelberg, 
says  in  his  Code  of  International  Law: 

"  298. 

"  If  a  river  is  the  boundary  between  two  States  and 
it  has  not  become  the  exclusive  property  of  one  of 
them,  the  frontier,  in  case  of  doubt,  is  taken  to  pass 
through  the  Thalweg. 

"  In  the  case  of  navigable  rivers,  the  Thalweg  is 
considered  in  doubtful  cases  as  the  middle  of  the 
river. 


122  THE    ALASKA    FRONTIER. 

"301. 

"  In  the  same  way,  the  middle  of  a  lake  serves  as 
the  line  of  demarcation  between  the  opposite  ripa- 
rian States,  unless  another  boundary  is  designated 
by  usage  or  treaty.  The  free  navigation  of  the  lake 
is  therewith  as  a  rule  accorded  to  the  inhabitants  of 
both  shores. 

"  In  this  case  the  middle  must  be  measured  from 
both  shores,  as  there  is  no  Thalweg,  or  at  least  it 
is  not  as  distinct  in  lakes  as  in  rivers. 

"  303. 

"  When  two  States,  which  touch  the  high  seas, 
are  so  close  to  one  another  that  the  territorial 
waters  {Kustensaum)  of  the  one  overlaps  the  terri- 
torial waters  of  the  other,  both  States  are  bound 
to  accord  to  each  other  the  right  of  sovereignty 
[Kiistenschutz)  in  the  common  area  or  else  to  agree 
upon  a  dividing  line. 

**  The  two  States  are  in  this  case  in  about  the 
same  position  as  the  Riparian  States  of  a  river  or 
a  lake.     They  are   both   concurrently   sovereign."  '^ 

"  "  298. 

' '  Bildet  ein  Fluss  die  Grenze  und  ist  derselbe  nicht  in  den 
ausschliesslichen  Besitz  des  einen  Uferstates  gelangt,  so  wird  im 
Zweifel  angenommen,  die  Mitte  des  Flusses  sei  die  Grenze. 

*  *  Bei  schiefTbaren  Flussen  wird  im  Zweifel  der  Thalweg  als 
Mitte  angenommen. 

4c  ^c  ♦  4c  «  *  4( 


ARGUMENT  OF   CANADA.  1 23 

The  Other  or  second  important  demand  of  Canada, 
which  seems  to  have  originated  about  1884,  and 
which  was  formulated  a  year  or  two  later  by  General 
Cameron,  is  that  the  boundary  line  shall  not  pass 
inland  around  all  the  sinuosities  that  bulge  into  the 
mainland  between  Mount  Saint  Elias  and  fifty-four 
degrees  forty  minutes,  but  that  it  shall  run  close 
along  side  of  the  coast-line  and  across  most  or  all 

"301. 

' '  Ebenso  wird  die  Mitte  eines  Landsees  als  Grenze  zwischen 
den  entgegengesetzten  Uferstaten  vermuthet,  wenn  nicht  durch 
Vertrage  oder  Uebung  eine  andere  Grenze  bestimmt  ist.  Dane- 
ben  wird  die  freie  Schifflahrt  auf  den  See  fiir  beiderlei  Uferbe- 
wohner  als  Regel  anerkannt. 

"  Hier  muss  die  Mitte  von  beiden  Ufem  ausgemessen  werden, 
da  es  einen  Thalweg  nicht  gibt,  oder  wenigstens  derselbe  nicht 
ebenso  deutlich  ist,  wie  bei  Flussen. 

******* 

"303. 

"Wenn  zwei  Staten,  welche  an  das  freie  Meer  Grenzen, 
einander  so  nahe  sind,  dass  der  Kiistensaum  je  des  einen  Stats 
in  den  Kiistensaum  des  andern  hinuberreicht,  so  sind  sie  ver- 
pflichtet,  einander  in  dem  gemeinsamen  Gebiet  wechselseitig  den 
Kiistenschutz  zuzugestehen,  oder  uber  eine  Scheidelinie  sich  zu 
vereinbaren. 

"Das  Verhaltniss  der  beiden  Uferstaten  wird  ahnlich  wie  in 
den  Fallen  der  Fluss-  oder  Seegrenze.  Es  tritt  eine  concurri- 
RENDE  Gebietshoheit  eiu." 

Das  Moderne  Volkerrecht  der  Civilisirten  Staten  als  Rechts- 
buch  Dargestellt  von  Dr.  J.  C.  Bluntschli :  Nordlingen,  1878. 

In  the  authorized  French  translation  by  M.  Lardy  (1870)  Le 
Droit  International  Codifie  the  above  paragraphs  are  rendered 
in  these  terms : 


124  THE   ALASKA   FRONTIER. 

of  the  estuaries  that  cut  into  the  continent  above 
the  Portland  Channel  or  Canal.  Canada  bases  this 
demand  upon  the  rule  of  International  Law,  that  all 
sea  waters  along  a  coast  line  are  for  one  league  or 
three  miles  territorial  waters,  and  that  where  even 
a  fiord  or  arm  of  the  sea  is  only  two  leagues  or  six 
miles  across  from  shore  to  shore,  from  that  line  in- 
land  the   rest  of  the   estuary   is   territorial  waters. 

"298. 

"  Lorsqu'une  rivi&re  forme  la  limite,  et  qu'elle  n'est  pas  deve- 
nue  propri6t6  exclusive  d'un  des  6tats  riverains,  on  admet  dans 
le  doute  que  la  fronti^re  passe  par  le  milieu  de  la  riviere. 

**  La  thalweg  des  rivieres  navigables  est  dans  le  doute  regard^ 
comme  le  milieu. 

******* 

"301. 

"Le  milieu  d'un  lac  sert  6galement  de  ligne  de  demarcation 
entre  les  deux  6tats  riverains,  k  moins  qu'une  autre  limite  n'ait 
6t6  consacr6e  par  1'  usage  ou  par  les  trait^s.  On  reconnait  dans 
la  r6gle  aux  habitants  des  deux  rives  le  droit  de  libre  navigation. 

"On  doit  prendre  ici  pour  ligne  fronti^re  le  milieu  du  lac, 
parce  qu'il  n'y  a  pas  de  thalweg  des  lacs. 

******* 

"303. 

"  Lorsque  deux  ^tats  sont  situ^s  au  bord  d'une  mer  libre, 
mais  si  6troite  que  la  bande  de  mer  faisant  partie  du  territoire  de 
r  un,  empi^te  sur  la  bande  de  mer  qui  depend  du  territoire  de 
r  autre,  ces  deux  6tats  sont  tenus  de  s'accorder  r^ciproquement 
les  droits  de  souverainet6  sur  I'espace  commun,  ou  de  fixer 
ensemble  une  ligne  de  demarcation. 

' '  Les  deux  6tats  se  trouvent  ici  ^  peu  pr^s  dans  la  m^me  posi- 
tion que  les  etats  riverains  d'un  fleuve  ou  d'un  lac.  lis  sont 
tous  deux  concurrement  souverains." 


ARGUMENT   OF   CANADA.  I  25 

Consequently,  they  say  that  as  in  the  treaty  of  1825 
it  was  provided  that  the  frontier  between  the  British 
possessions  and  the  Russian  lisiere  should  be  a  line 
drawn  along  the  crest  of  the  mountains  "situees 
parallelement  a  la  cote "  and  that  in  case  at  any 
point  the  summit  of  the  mountains  should  prove  to 
be  further  than  ten  marine  leagues  from  the  ocean, 
that  then  the  line  of  demarcation  should  be  drawn 
by  a  line  parallel  to  the  sinuosities  of  the  shore, 
from  which  it  shall  be  never  further  than  ten  leagues 
— the  Canadians  say  that  in  estimating  the  coast  line 
the  outer  edge  of  the  territorial  waters  must  be 
taken,  and  that  from  this  imaginary  line  the  ten 
league  limit  must  be  computed.  Thus  they  main- 
tain, that  the  line  of  frontier  does  not  pass  around 
all  the  sinuosities  of  the  coast,  but  across  many 
of  them,  leaving  the  upper  reaches,  as  the  greater 
part  of  the  upper  extremity  of  the  Lynn  Canal,  for 
example,  within  Canadian  Territory .'^^ 

"  From  the  first  the  Canadians  have  veered  and  changed  about 
continually  in  their  demands.  Canadian  writers  by  suppressing 
some  facts  and  twisting  and  manipulating  others  to  suit  their 
wishes,  have  managed  to  present  to  their  countrymen  and  their 
kindred  in  Britain  some  apparently  plausible  arguments  in  sup- 
port of  the  Canadian  claim.  The  Canadian  method  of  citing 
evidence  brings  to  mind  the  following  anecdote  from  the  pen 
of  Charles  Reade's  The  Cloister  and  the  Hearth.  (Chapter 
XXXVI.  Note) :  ' '  Sinclair  was  a  singer :  and  complained  to 
the  manager  that  m  the  operatic  play  of  Rob  Roy  he  had  a 
multitude  of  mere  words  to  utter  between  the  songs.  'Cut, 
my  boy,  cut ! '  said  the  manager.     On  this,  vox.  et  p.  n.  cut 


126  THE    ALASKA   FRONTIER. 

In  support  of  this  proposition  they  invoke  the 
well  known  principle  of  International  Law  that 
a  State  has  jurisdiction  over  its  marginal  waters 
to  the  distance  of  one  marine  league  from  the 
shore.  And  they  cite  Bluntschli  and  other  world 
famed  authorities  in  support  of  their  position. 

An  argument  pressed  to  support  the  Canadian 
wish  that  the  outer  edge  of  the  territorial  waters 
should  be  taken  instead  of  the  shore  line  of  the 
sinuosities  of  the  coast  in  measuring  the  ten  marine 
leagues  inland,  is  that  in  both  the  English  and  the 
Russian  draft  treaties,  the  word  mer  was  used  in  the 
French  copies,  while  in  the  French  version  of  the 
actual  treaty  the  word  mer  has  given  place  to  ocean. 
In  the  draft  convention  that  George  Canning  sent 
July  12,  1824,  to  Sir  Charles  Bagot  as  a  basis  for  ne- 
gotiations, among  the  words  used  in  Article  III.  of 
that  draft  to  designate  how  the  eastern  boundary  of 
the  lisi^re  should  run  occurs  the  expression,  **  depuis 
la  mer  vers  I'interieur  "  (from  the  sea  towards  the  in- 
terior). In  Article  II.  of  the  Russian  counter-draft,  in 
which  the  eastern  boundary  of  the  lisiere  is  described, 
the  expression  used  is  "  a  partir  du  bord  de  la  mer" 

Scott,  and  doubtless  many  of  his  cuts  would  not  have  discredited 
the  condensers  of  evidence.  But  only  one  of  his  master-strokes 
has  reached  posterity.  His  melodious  organs  had  been  taxed 
with  this  sentence :  '  Rashleigh  is  my  cousin ;  but,  for  what 
reason  I  cannot  divine,  he  is  my  bitterest  enemy.'  This  he  con- 
densed and  delivered  thus :  '  Rashleigh  is  my  cousin,  for  what 
reason  I  cannot  divine.'  " 


MER    AND   OCfeAN   THEORY.  1 27 

(starting  from  the  sea  shore).  Finally  in  the  treaty 
of  1825  itself,  among  the  words  used  in  Article  IV. 
to  describe  the  limits  to  the  east  of  the  lisiere  occurs 
the  expression,  '*se  trouveroit  a  la  distance  de  plus 
de  10  lieues  marines  de  I'ocean."  It  is  argued  that 
from  this  substitution  of  the  word  ocean  in  the  treaty 
for  the  word  mer  that  was  used  in  the  two  draft- 
conventions  the  limit  of  the  ocean  was  intended  as 
the  line  from  which  the  ten  marine  leagues  inland 
should  be  measured,  and  it  is  urged  that  by  the 
use  of  the  word  ocean  instead  of  mer  the  salt  water 
outside  of  the  islands  was  meant. 

The  absurdity  of  this  argument,  however,  is  proved 
by  the  fact  that  the  words  ocean  and  mer  in  French 
geographies  and  in  International  Law  are  used  in- 
terchangeably to  mean  the  salt  water  that  encircles 
all  the  land  on  the  earth. 

To  begin  with  the  words  m^r  and  ocean  are  both 
used  in  the  treaty  itself  to  mean  the  same  thing, 
to  wit :  in  Article  I.,  Ocean  Pacifique,  and  in  Arti- 
de  VI.,  Mer  Pacifique. 

Then  in  the  Petite  Geographie  Ancienne  of  Meissas 

and   Michelot  published  at  Paris  in   1857,  the  mers 

of  Europe  are  described  on  pages  three  and  four 

as  follows: 

"4  Mers. 

"On  comptait  en  Europe  treize  mers  principales, 
dont  trois  grandes  et  dix  petites. 

•*Les  trois  grandes  6taient:  1°  I'Ocean  Hyperbor^e 


128  THE   ALASKA   FRONTIER. 

(oc^an  Glacial  du  nord) ;  2°  Tocean  Atlantique ;  3°  la 
mer  Interieure  (Mediterranee).  Les  dix  petites  etai- 
ent:  1°  la  mer  Germanique  (mer  du  Nord);  2°  la  mer 
Hibernienne  (mer  d'Islande),  formee  par  I'ocean  At- 
lantique;" and  so  on.  In  this  quotation  it  is  seen 
that  the  two  words  are  used  interchangeably. 

In  the  Petite  Geographie  Methodique,  by  the  same 
authors,  published  at  Paris  in  1 896,  the  watery  mass 
of  the  earth  is  thus  described: 

"On  donne  le  nom  ^ ocean  ou  de  mer  d  la  vaste 
etendue  d'eau  sal^e  qui  couvre  les  trois  quarts  du 
globe. 

"On  appelle  encore  mers  diverses  parties  de 
I'ocean  auxquelles  on  donne  des  noms  particuliers." 

A  litde  further  on  Meissas  and  Michelot  say  : 

"  L' Ocean-Glacial  du  nord  et  celui  du  sud  s'ap- 
pellent   aussi  mers   Glaciates  ou  mers  PolairesJ* 

How  the  two  words  are  used  interchangeably  in 
International  Law  is  well  expressed  by  Rivier  who 
was  a  thorough  master  of  his   native  language. 

"La  mer,  ou  I'Ocean,"  he  says,'^^  "est  I'immense 
etendue  d'eau  salee  qui  entoure  et  relie  les  continents. 

'♦  Elle  est  libre. 

"  La  mer  libre  est  done  la  haute  mer,  qu'on  nomme 
aussi  la  pleine  mer.  Le  langage  juridique  use  de  ces 
divers  termes  indifferemment,  et  le  meme  sens  est 

"  Principes  du  Droit  des  Gens  par  Alphonse  Rivier :  Paris, 
1896,  Volume  I.,  pages  234-235. 


MER    AND   OCfeAN.  1 29 

generalement  attribue  aux  mots  mer  et  Ocean  em- 
ployes sans  qualificatif.  Quant  on  enonce  le  principe 
de  la  liberte  de  la  mer,  ou  des  mers,  il  s'agit  de  la 
haute  mer." 

Of  the  meaning  of  mer  and  ocean,  Littre,  who  was  a 
member  of  V Academie  Frangaise,  says  in  his  Diction- 
naire  de  la  Langue  Frangaise  : 

"  REM.  Le  mot  mer,  au  singulier,  se  prend  dans 
deux  sens :  i°  I'amas  des  eaux  qui  environne  la 
terre ;  2°  dans  une  acception  plus  restreinte,  une 
certaine  etendue  d'eau  salee  contigue  aux  cotes  et 
portant  un  nom  particulier  comme  la  mer  d'Irlande, 
la  mer  du  Nord,  etc." 

"REM.  Ocean  prend  un  O  majuscule  quand  il 
signifie  la  vaste  etendue  d'eau  salee  qui  entoure  le 
globe,  ou  quand  il  est  dit  absolument  pour  ocean 
Atlantique,  ou  pour  le  dieu  mythologique ;  et  un  o 
minuscule  quand  on  parie  des  parties  de  cet  ocean: 
I'ocean  Atlantique,  ou  quand  il  est  pris  figurement : 
un  ocean  de  feux.  On  observera  que  les  adjectifs 
qui  determinent  les  parties  de  I'Ocean  prennent  une 
majuscule :  I'ocean  Atlantique,  I'ocean  Pacifique, 
I'ocean  Indien." 

Then  defining  the  adjective  Oceane,  Littre  says  : 

"  REM.  L' Academie  [Frangaise]  ecrit  mer  oceane, 
par  un  o  minuscule ;  il  faudrait  un  o  majuscule,  mer 
Oceane,  puisqu'on  ecrit  avec  une  majuscule  mer 
Mediterranee,  mer  Atlantique,  mer    Pacifique,    etc." 

In    the    first  French  dictionary   which   V Academie 


130  THE    ALASKA    FRONTrER. 

Frangaise  published  in  1694,  the  interchangeable 
use  of  mer  and  ocean  is  thus  attested  at  that 
time :  '^ 

"  Mer.  s.  f.  L'amas  des  eaux  qui  composent  un 
globe  avec  la  terre,  &  qui  la  couvrent  en  plusieurs 
endroits.  Lagrande  mer,  ou  lamer  Oceane.  mer Medi- 
terranee.  mer  Atlantique.  mer  Germamque.  m-er  Bri- 
tannique.  mer  Pacifique.  mer  Glaciale. 

4:  «  ^-  4:  4:  4: 

"  On  appelle,  La  mer  Mediterranee,  Mer  du  Le- 
vant, &  rOcean,  Mer  du  Ponant." 

"Ocean,  s.  m.  La  grande  mer  qui  environne 
toute    la  terre." 

From  the  above  quotations  from  Littre,  backed  by 
the  first  dictionary  of  the  French  Academy,  it  is  clear 
that  not  only  the  first  authority  to-day  on  the  meaning 
and  value  of  French  words,  says  that  mer  and  ocean 
can  be  used  interchangeably  to  mean  the  salt  water 
that  envelops  the  continents,  but  also  that  he  actu- 
ally uses  himself  the  expressions  mer  Pacifique  and 
f  ocean  Pacifique. 

Consequently  the  attempt  to  draw  a  distinction 
as  to  the  meaning  of  the  words  mer  and  ocean  used 

'*  Le  Dictionnaire  de  V  Academic  Franfoise  dedU  au  Roy. 
A  Paris :  Chez  la  Veuve  de  Jean  Baptiste  Coignard,  Imprimeur 
ordinaire  du  Roy,  &  de  1' Academic  Franjoise,  rue  S.  Jacques,  a 
la  Bible  d'Or:  et  Chez  Jean  Baptiste  Coignard,  Imprimeur  & 
Libraire  ordinaire  du  Roy,  &  de  I'Acad^mie  Fran9oise,  rue  S. 
Jacques  pr^s  S.  Severin,  au  Livre  d'Or. — M.DC.LXXXXIV. 
Avec  privilege  de  sa  Majest6. 


"PARALL^LE    AUX    SINUOSIT^S    DE    LA    COTE."       I3I 

in  the  draft-conventions  and  in  the  treaty  of  1825 
falls  to   the  ground. 

In  constructing  the  theory  and  argument  that,  in 
estimating  the  ten  marine  leagues  inland  provided 
for  by  the  fourth  article  of  the  treaty,  the  outer 
edge  of  the  United  States  territorial  waters  should 
be  taken  as  the  starting  point  of  measurement,  the 
Anglo-Canadian  advocates  have  left  out  of  account 
the  strict  and  exact  meaning  of  the  last  part  of  the 
fourth  article  of  the  treaty  of  1825.  The  French 
text  of  the  treaty  was  the  official  version,  and  the 
English  and  the  Canadian  Governments  have  both 
recognized  it  as  such."  At  the  end  of  the  fourth 
article  of  the  treaty,  it  is  said  that  the  frontier  line 
of  the  lisiere  shall  be  drawn  **  parallele  aux  sinuosi- 
tes  de  la  cote."  What  does  this  French  expression 
mean?  The  significance  of  this  phrase  is  made  ab- 
solutely clear  by  the  use  of  the  words,  cote  and 
sinuosites.  Littre,  in  his  Dictionnaire  de  la  Langue 
Frangaise,  defines  cote  in  this  manner:  "Hq"  Terme 
de  marine.  Rivage  de  la  mer.  Une  cote  basse,  sab- 
lonneuse,  escarpee.  Ranger  la  cote,  aller  le  long 
de  la  cote.  Donner  a  la  cote,  echouer.  Le  cour- 
rant  portait  a  la  cote.  II  lui  donna  la  gouvernement 
de  toute  la  cote  de  la  mer,  VAUGEL.  Q.  C.  liv. 
II.  ch.  8.      Toute   la  cote  etait   couverte  d'hommes, 

-  "Fur  Seal  Arbitration,  Volume  IV,,  page  500.  Dr.  Daw- 
son's letter  to  Sir  Charles  Tupper  of  February  7th,  1888  : 
Senate  Ex.  Doc.  No.  146,  ^oth  Congress,  2d  Session,  pages  ^—7. 


132  THE   ALASKA   FRONTIER. 

d'armes,  de  chevaux  et  de  chariots  en  mouvement, 
FEN.  Tel.  XX.  La  plupart  des  peuples  des  cotes 
de  I'Afrique  sont  sauvages  et  barbares,  MONTESQ. 
Esp.  XXI.  2.  *  *  *  Se  dit,  par  extension,  des 
approches  de  la  terre,  jusqu'a  une  certaine  distance 
au  large.  Une  cote  pleine  d'ecueils.  Les  pirates 
qui  couraient  nos  cotes. 

•}«  w^  •{«  •{•  *{•  •{• 

Au  plur.  Les  contrees  voisines  de  la  mer."  Thus 
Littre  shows  that  cote  means  the  general  shore  line 
along  salt  water. 

In  the  first  dictionary  of  the  French  language  that 
r Academie  Frangaise  published  in  1694,  the  mean- 
ing of  sinuosite  is  thus  expressed  :  '^ 

"  Sinueux,  euse.  adj.  Qui  est  tortueux;  qui  fait 
plusieurs  tours  &  detours.  II  n'  a  guere  d'usage  que 
dans  la  poesie.  Les  replis  sinueux  cT un  serpent,  d'une 
couleuvre.  le  cours  sinueux  de  Meandre. 

"  Sinuosite.  s.  f.  Estat  d'une  chose  sinueuse.  Les 
sinuositez  d'un  serpent,  cette  riviere  a  beaucoup  de  sinu- 
ositez,  fait  beaucoup  de  sinuositez. 

"On  dit  aussi,  En  termes  de  Chirurgie,  qu'  Une 
playe  a  beaucoup  de  sinuositez,  pour  dire,  qu'EUe  fait 

"^^  Le  DicHonnaire  de  V  Academic  Frangoise  dedU  au  Roy.  A 
Paris  ;  Chez  la  Veuve  de  Jean  Baptiste  Coignard,  Imprimeur  or- 
dinaire du  Roy,  &  de  1' Academie  Franyoise,  rue  S.  Jacques,  a 
la  Bible  d'Or:  et  Chez  Jean  Baptiste  Coignard,  Imprimeur  & 
Libraire  ordinaire  du  Roy,  &  de  1' Academie  Franpoise,  rue  S. 
Jacques  pr^s  S.  Severin,  au  Livre  d'Or. — M.DC.LXXXXIV. 
Avec  privilege  de  sa  Majesty. 


**PARALLfeLE   AUX   SINUOSIT^S    DE    LA   COTE."       1 33 

des  tours  &  des  detours.  On  dit  de  mesne,  quY/jj/ 
a  des  endroits  sous  la  terre  ou  il  y  a  beaucoup  de  sinuos- 
itezy  Then  Littre  defines  sinuosite  as  meaning : 
"Qualite  de  ce  qui  est  sinueux.  Cette  riviere  fait  beau- 
coup  de  sinuosites.  II  allait  dans  une  chaloupe  avec 
deux  ingenieurs  cotoyer  les  deux  royaumes  de  Dane- 
mark  et  de  Suede,  pour  mesurer  toutes  les  sinuosites, 
Font.  Czar  Pierre.  Les  jeunes  Deliens  se  melerent 
avec  eux  (les  Atheniens)  pour  figurer  les  sinuosites 
du  labyrinthe  de  Crete,  Barthel,  Anach.  ch.  76."  Web- 
ster defines  sinuosity  to  mean  :  **  i.  The  quality  of 
being  sinuous,  or  bending  in  and  out.  2.  A  series  of 
bends  and  turns  in  arches  or  other  irregular  figures  ; 
a  series  of  windings.  *  A  line  of  coast  certainly 
amounting  with  its  sinuosities,  to  more  than  700 
miles.'     S.  Smith." 

Thus  back  in  1694  the  men  who  were  officially 
empowered  by  the  State  to  declare  the  meaning 
of  French  words  and  to  regulate  French  grammar, 
and  the  great  authority'  of  to-day  on  the  same  sub- 
ject, have  said  that  a  sinuosity  was  an  indentation 
or  a  pouch.  Such  a  meaning  exactly  fits  the  con- 
figuration of  the  Lynn  Canal  or  Channel,  for  instance, 
which  is  a  sinuosite  de  la  cote  of  the  northwest  coast 
of  North  America.  The  water  of  the  Lynn  Canal 
is  salt  or  sea  water,  not  fresh  water.  And  the  shores 
that  enclose  the  Lynn  Canal  are  part  of  the  general 
coast  line  or  cote  to  use  the  word  of  the  French 
text    of    the    treaty    of     1825.       Consequently,    in 


134  THE    ALASKA    FRONTIER. 

finding  the  fi-ontier  line  according  to  the  expression 
"  parallele  aux  sinuosites  de  la  cote,"  the  shore  line 
passing  around  the  Lynn  Canal  must  be  taken  as  the 
basis  fi-om  which  to  measure  the  ten  marine  leagues 
inland  and  not  some  imaginary  water  line  cross- 
ing near  its  mouth.  And  so  in  the  same  way  with 
all  the  other  sinuosities  or  fiords  or  estuaries  that 
cut  into  the  mainland  above  fifty-four  forty,  their 
shore  lines  must  be  taken  as  the  lines  of  depart- 
ure from  which  to  measure  the  ten  marine  leagues 
inland. 

Thus  by  inserting  the  words  sinuosites  and  cote,  the 
negotiators  made  it  perfectly  clear  that — in  directing 
that  the  eastern  line  of  demarcation  of  the  lisiere 
should  be  drawn  "  parallele  aux  sinuosites  de  la 
cote," — they  meant  that  the  frontier  should  pass 
around  all  the  sinuosities  that  advance  into  the 
mainland  and  not  cut  across  any  of  them,  so  that 
the  whole  of  the  Lynn  Canal  and  all  the  other 
fiords  above  the  Portland  Canal  would  be  included 
within  the  Russian  lisiere.  For  if  the  line  cut  across 
the  sinuosities  of  the  shore,  how  could  it  be  parallel  to 
them  f 

Besides,  Mr.  William  H.  Dall  of  the  United  States 
Geological  Survey  has  pointed  out  that  the  Cana- 
dian argument,  that  the  ten  leagues  inland  should 
be  measured  from  the  outer  line  of  the  territorial 
waters  as  the  basis  of  measurement,  disproves  itself 
through  a  reductio  ad  absurdum. 


3  H  A  t\ 
OF  THE 


BALLS   ARGUMENT.  1 35 

"  It  happens,"  he  says,'^  "  that  there  are  none  of 
the  islands  in  the  archipelago  north  of  Dixon's 
Entrance  which  do  not  at  some  point  approach 
within  six  miles  of  one  another  or  of  the  conti- 
nental shore.  They  are  all  mountainous.  As  Gen- 
eral Cameron,  if  he  applies  his  hypothesis,  has  no 
right  to  apply  it  partially  or  imperfectly,  it  will  fol- 
low that  all  the  archipelago  for  that  purpose  will 
become  solid  land.  Of  this  '  land '  there  would  be 
a  strip,  excluding  all  of  the  continent,  in  no  place 
less  than  fifty  and  sometimes  eighty  miles  wide. 
Under  the  treaty  not  over  thirty  miles  from  the 
ocean  could  be  possessed  by  Russia  when  not 
mountainous,  and  as  the  mountains  come  to  the 
sea  nearly  all  the  way  from  Cape  Muzon  to  Cape 
Spencer,  the  only  property  possessed  by  Russia  in 
the  archipelago  would  have  been  (i)  Prince  of 
Wales  Island,  which  in  the  treaty  is  absolutely 
given  to  her,  and  (2)  a  strip  a  mile  or  two  in  aver- 
age width  on  the  ocean  shores  of  the  most  sea- 
ward islands.  It  is  perfectly  easy  to  verify  this 
if  one  would  take  such  trouble,  and  it  is  certainly 
absurd  enough  for  anybody." 

The  Canadians,  moreover,  overlook  that  rule  of 
International  Law,  that  two  States  can  agree  by 
treaty  or  otherwise,  to  suspend  as  between  them- 
selves any  rule   of  the    Laws  of  Nations,  provided 

^^  Senate  Ex.  Doc.  No.  146,  §oth  Congress,  2nd  Session, 
page  25. 


136  THE    ALASKA   FRONTIER. 

that  they  do  not  thereby  trespass  upon  the  rights 
of  other  Powers. 

Grotius  recognized  that  two  Nations  can,  as  be- 
tween themselves,  alter  the  rules  of  the  Laws  of 
Nations.     Thus  he  said : 

"  For  peoples  as  well  as  individuals  may  by  com- 
pact concede  to  another  not  only  the  Rights  which 
are  theirs  specially,  but  also  those  which  they  have  in 
common  with  all  men  :  and  when  this  is  done,  we 
may  say,  what  Ulpian  said  when  an  estate  was  sold 
on  condition  that  the  purchaser  should  not  carry  on  a 
thunny  fishery  to  the  prejudice  of  the  seller,  namely, 
that  there  could  not  be  a  servitude  over  the  sea,  but 
that  the  bona  fides  of  the  contract  required  that  the 
rule  of  the  sale  should  be  observed  ;  and  therefore 
that  the  possessors  and  their  successors  were  under 
a  personal  obligation  to  observe  the  condition."^" 

Von  Martens,  a  representative  of  Hanover  at  the 
Diet  of  the  Germanic  Confederation,  who  taught  the 
study  of  International  Law  at  Gottingen  in  the  latter 
part  of  the  eighteenth  and  the  beginning  of  the  nine- 

*• ' '  Possunt  enim  ut  singuli,  ita  et  populi  pactis,  non  tantum  de 
jure  quod  proprie  sibi  competit,  sed  et  de  eo  quod  cum  omnibus 
hominibus  commune  habent,  in  gratiam  ejus  cujus  id  interest 
decedere :  quod  cum  fit,  dicendum  est  quod  dixit  Ulpianus  in  ea 
facti  specie,  qua  fundus  erat  venditus  hac  lege,  ne  contra  vendi- 
torem  piscatio  thynnaria  exerceretur,  mari  servitutem  imponi  non 
potuisse,  sed  bonam  fidem  contractus  exposcere,  ut  lex  vendi- 
tionis  servetur.  Itaque  personas  possidentium  et  in  jus  eorum 
succedentium  obligari."  De  Jure  Balli  ac  Pads,  Lib.  II.,  Cap. 
III.  XV.,  2. 


INTERNATIONAL    LAW.  I  37 

teenth  centuries,  held,  concerning  the  ability  of  two 
States  to  change  as  between  themselves  the  Laws 
of  Nations,  this  opinion  : 

"  In  the  same  way,  it  depends  upon  the  free  choice 
of  a  nation  to  conclude  or  not  treaties  with  another, 
without  that  a  third  power  is  authorized  to  stop  her, 
so  long  as  these  treaties  do  not  injure  the  right  of 
the  third  power,  and  without  especially  that  she  is 
authorized  to  force  her  to  conclude  a  treaty,  or  to 
accede  to  it  against  its  will."  ^^ 

Phillimore,  an  English  authority  on  the  Laws  of 
Nations,  says : 

••  No  treaty  between  two  or  more  Nations  can 
affect  the  general  principles  of  International  Law 
prejudicially  to  the  interests  of  other  Nations  not 
parties  to  such  covenant."*^ 

He  says  also : 

"  Moreover,  the  Right  to  enter  into  lawful  Conven- 
tions or  Treaties  with  other  States  is  as  unquestion- 
ably inherent  in  every  independent  State,  as  the  right 

'^  "  De  m^me,  il  depend  du  libre  arbitre  d'  une  nation  de  cimen- 
ter  ou  non  des  trait^s  quelconques  avec  une  autre,  sans  qu'une 
tierce  puissance  soit  autoris6e  k  Temp^cher,  tant  que  ces  trait^s 
ne  blessent  pas  ses  droits,  et  sans  que  surtout  elle  soit  autoris6e, 
a  la  forcer  de  conclure  un  traits,  ou  d'y  acc6der  contre  son  gr6." 

Precis  du  Droit  des  Gens  modeme  de  I'  Europe,  par  G.  F.  de 
Martens  :  Paris,  1864,  Volume  I.,  §  119 — "  De  la  liberty  de  con- 
clure des  Trait6s,"  page  320. 

**  Commentaries  upon  International  Law  by  Sir  Robert  Philli- 
more, London,  1879.     Third  Edition,  Volume  I.,  page  46. 


138  THE    ALASKA   FRONTIER. 

to  make  lawful  covenants  is  inherent  in  every  indi- 
vidual." 83 

In  recent  years,  Bluntschli  writes  : 

"402. 

"  States,  in  so  far  as  they  are  independent,  can 
regulate  by  treaties  the  questions  which  specially 
concern  them,  and  thus  create  between  themselves 
a  purely  conventional  law."  ** 

In  addition,  the  Duke  of  Wellington  in  a  note  to 
Count  Lieven,  the  Russian  Ambassador  at  London 
on  November  28th,  1822,  also  recognized  this  rule. 
Speaking  of  the  exclusive  sovereignty  that  Russia 
had  claimed  in  the  Ukase  of  1821  over  Bering  Sea 
and  a  considerable  part  of  the  Pacific  Ocean  he  said : 

*'  Commentaries  upon  International  Law,  by  Sir  Robert  Philli- 
more,  London,  1882.     Third  Edition,  Volume  II.,  page  69. 

"  Das  Modeme  Volkerrecht  der  Civilisirten  Staten  als  Rechts- 
biich  Dargestellt  von  Dr.  J.  C.  Bluntschli:  Nordlingen,  1878. 
The  original  German  text  of  Bluntschli  is  as  follows : 

"402. 

' '  Die  Staten  konnen  als  selbstandige  Personen  ihre  besondern 
Rechtsverhaltnisse  durch  Vertrage  unter  einander  ordnen,  so  dass 
daraus  eigentliches  Vertragsrecht  entsteht." 

In  the  authorized  French  translation  of  Bluntschli,  by  M.  de 
Lardy,  first  Secretary  to  the  Swiss  Legation  at  Paris  (1870),  this 
paragraph  is  rendered  thus  : 

"402. 

' '  Les  6tats,  en  tant  que  personnes  ind^pendantes,  peuvent 
r6gler  par  des  trait^s  les  questions  qui  les  concernent  sp^cialement, 
et  cr6er  ainsi  entre  eux  un  droit  purement  conventionel." 


INTERNATIONAL    LAW.  I  39 

"  We  contend  that  no  Power  whatever  can  ex- 
clude another  from  the  use  of  the  open  sea.  A 
Power  can  exclude  itself  from  the  navigation  of  a 
certain  coast,  sea,  etc.,  by  its  own  act  or  engage- 
ment, but  it  cannot  by  right  be  excluded  by  another. 
This  we  consider  as  the  law  of  nations,  and  we 
cannot  negotiate  under  a  paper  in  which  a  right  is 
asserted  inconsistent  with  this  principle."^ 

Thus  an  English  statesman  of  world  wide  note  is 
in  accord  with  the  masters  of  International  Law  that 
two  Nations  can,  as  between  themselves,  change 
the  Laws  of  Nations. 

Consequently,  according  to  the  Laws  of  Nations 
and  the  interpretation  placed  by  the  Duke  of  Wel- 
lington upon  the  rules  and  regulations  in  force  be- 
tween Nations,  the  Muscovite  and  the  British  Empires 
had  ample  and  perfect  authority  to  disregard,  as 
between  themselves,  a  rule  of  International  Law, 
provided  that  they  did  not  thereby  trespass  upon 
the  rights  of  other  States.  Russia  and  England 
could  agree  then,  as  they  did  by  the  treaty  of  Feb- 
ruary, 1825,  to  take — irrespective  of  the  theory  that 
for  purposes  of  sovereignty  territorial  waters  are 
"  land" — the  shore  line  of  the  mainland  as  the  basis 
of  computation  in  measuring  ten  marine  leagues  in- 
land. And  the  evidence  is  abundant  to  show  that 
the    shore   of   the   continent   itself  was   exactly   the 

^Jmr  Seal  Arbitration,  Volume  IV.,  page  35  and  also  page  391. 


140 


THE   ALASKA   FRONTIER. 


base  line  that  they  intended  should  be  used  to 
compute  the  ten  leagues  towards  the  interior  and 
not  an  imaginary  water  line  passing  from  headland 
to  headland. 

Ex-Secretary  of  State,  John  W.  Foster,  has  shown 
too,  that  the  negotiations  that  resulted  in  the  treaty 
of  1825  cut  off  the  British  Traders  from  all  access 
to  the  interior  waters  of  the  lisiere  except  by  special 
license.  The  seventh  article  of  the  treaty  provided, 
•*  that,  for  the  space  of  ten  years  from  signature  of 
the  present  convention,  the  vessels  of  the  two  Powers, 
or  those  belonging  to  their  respective  subjects,  shall 
mutually  be  at  liberty  to  frequent,  without  any  hin- 
drance whatever,  all  the  interior  seas,  gulfs,  havens, 
and  creeks  on  the  coast  mentioned  in  article  three 
for  the  purpose  of  fishing  and  of  trading  with  the 
natives."  The  negotiations  were  broken  off  a  second 
time  because  the  Russian  plenipotentiaries  refused  to 
make  perpetual  this  right  to  frequent  without  hin- 
drance the  inland  waters.  When  the  negotiations 
were  renewed,  they  were  resumed  upon  the  basis  of 
the  fourth  article  of  the  Russo-American  treaty  of 
1824.^    In  referring  to  this  point.  Secretary  George 


8  6  "Article  Quatri^me. 
"  II  est  n^anmoins  entendu  que 
pendant  un  terme  de  dix  ann^es,  h. 
compter  de  la  signature  de  la  pr6- 
sente  Convention,  les  vaisseaux  des 
deux  Puissances,  ou  qui  appartien- 
droient  k  leurs  citoyens  ou  sujets 
respectifs,    pourront    r^ciproque- 


"  Article  Fourth. 

"It  is  nevertheless  understood 
that  during  a  term  of  ten  years, 
counting  from  the  signature  of  the 
present  convention,  the  ships  of 
both  powers,  or  which  belong  to 
their  citizens  or  subjects  respec- 
tively, may  reciprocally  frequent 


FOSTERS    ARGUMENT.  141 

Canning  said  in  his  instructions  to  Sir  Stratford 
Canning:  "  Russia  cannot  mean  to  give  the  United 
States  of  America  what  she  withholds  from  us,  nor 
to  withhold  from  us  anything  that  she  consented  to 
give  to  the  United  States."®^  With  pungent  force 
Mr.  Foster  has  pointed  out  how  the  provisions  of 
the  seventh  article  of  the  treaty  of  1825  show  that 
all  the  inland  waters  of  the  lisiere  in  their  whole 
extent  were  to  belong  to  Russia.  He  has  said  that, 
"  this  ten  years'  privilege  is  inconsistent  with  any 
other  interpretation  of  the  treaty  than  the  complete 
sovereignty  of  Russia  over,  not  only  a  strip  of  terri- 
tory on  the  mainland  which  follows  around  the  sinu- 
osity of  the  sea,  but  also  of  the  waters  of  all  bays  or 
inlets  extending  from  the  ocean  into  the  mainland. 
This  is  the  more  manifest  when  the  subsequent  his- 
tory respecting  the  provision  of  article  four  of  the 
American  and  article  seven  of  the  British  treaty  is 
recalled.  At  the  expiration  of  the  time  of  ten  years 
the  Russian  Minister  at  Washington  gave  notice  to 
the  Government  of  the  United  States  that  the  privi- 
lege had  expired,  and  a  notification  to  that  effect 
was  made  in  the  public  Press  of  the  United  States. 


ment  frequenter  sans  entrave  quel- 
conque,  les  mers  int^rieures,  les 
golfes,  havres  et  criques  sur  la  c6te 
mentionn^e  dans  I'article  prece- 
dent, afin  d'y  faire  la  p^che  et  le 
commerce  avec  les  naturels  du 
pays." 


without  any  hindrance  whatever 
the  interior  seas,  gulfs,  harbors, 
and  creeks  upon  the  coast  men- 
tioned in  the  preceding  article,  for 
the  purpose  of  fishing  and  trading 
with  the  natives  of  the  country." 


"  Fur  Seal  Arbitration,  Volume  IV. ,  page  447. 


142  THE    ALASKA    FRONTIER. 

Persistent  efforts  were  made  by  the  United  States 
to  have  the  privilege  extended  for  another  period  of 
ten  years,  but  it  was  firmly  refused  by  Russia.  The 
British  privilege  was  likewise  terminated  upon  the 
expiration  of  the  ten  years  mentioned,  and  this 
article  of  the  treaty  was  never  again  revived."*^ 

Furthermore,  it  is  a  fact  that  George  Canning  in 
his  instructions  to  Sir  Charles  Bagot,  of  January  15th, 
1824,*^  stated  that  while  the  British  Government 
wished  to  restrict  the  extent  of  Muscovite  territory  as 
much  as  possible,  yet  it  was  ready  to  give,  as  a  quid 
pro  quo  for  the  repeal  by  the  Russian  Government 
of  the  Ukase  of  182 1,  an  eastern  frontier  line  for  the 
Russian  lisiere  one  hundred  miles  back  from  the 
ocean,  and  to  have  the  line  to  the  Arctic  Ocean 
drawn  along  the  one  hundred  and  thirty  fifth  de- 
gree of  longitude. 

Canning  said : — 

"It  is  absolutely  essential,  therefore,  to  guard 
against  any  unfounded  pretensions,  or  any  vague 
expectation  of  Russia  to  the  eastward,  and  for  this 
purpose  it  is  necessary  that  whatever  degree  of  lati- 
tude be  assumed,  a  definite  degree  of  longitude 
should  be  assigned  as  a  limit  between  the  territorial 
rights  of  the  two  Powers. 

"  If  your  Excellency  can  obtain    the    strait   which 

^  The  Alaskan  Boundary ^  by  the  Hon.  John  W;  Foster,  page 
439. 

*•  Fur  Seal  Arbitration^  Volume  IV.,  pages  419-420. 


canning's  hundred  miles  lisi^re.  143 

separates  the  islands  from  the  mainland  as  the  bound- 
ary, the  prolongation  of  the  line  drawn  through  that 
strait  would  strike  the  mainland  near  Mount  Elias — 
the  lowest  point  of  unquestioned  Russian  discovery. 
But  if  that  were  too  much  to  insist  upon,  the  135th 
degree  of  longitude,  as  suggested  by  your  Excellency, 
northward  from  the  head  of  Lynn's  Harbour,  might 
suffice. 

"  It  would,  however,  in  that  case,  be  expedient  to 
assign,  with  respect  to  the  mainland  southward  of 
that  point,  a  limit,  say,  of  50  or  100  miles  from  the 
coast,  beyond  which  the  Russian  posts  should  not 
be  extended  to  the  eastward.  We  must  not  on  any 
account  admit  the  Russian  territory  to  extend  at  any 
point  to  the  Rocky  Mountains." 

Such  an  agreement  would  have  included  in  Rus- 
sian America  or  Alaska  all  the  Klondike  gold 
district. 

The  facts  already  cited  show  how  absurd  and  unjust 
is  the  claim  that  Canada  presented  at  the  Quebec 
Conference  in  1898  to  the  upper  reaches  of  the  sinu- 
osities that  cut  into  the  continental  shore  above  fifty- 
four  forty.  And  yet,  there  is  still  more  English  and 
Canadian  evidence  of  great  importance — which  Ca- 
nadian writers  have  ignored — that  practically  debars 
both  the  British  and  the  Canadian  Governments  from 
pleading  in  support  of  the  Canadian  demands  to  an 
outlet  on  tide  water  above  the  Portland  Channel  or 
Canal. 


144  THE    ALASKA    FRONTIER. 

In  1 90 1,  three  years  after  the  territorial  claims  of 
Canada  were  presented  at  the  Quebec  Conference 
in  1898,  a  map  "North  West  Canada  &  British 
Columbia "  showing  the  dioceses  of  the  Church  of 
England  in  Canada  was  published  in  the  Proceed- 
ings of  the  Church  Missionary  Society.^"  (See  Map 
No.  24.)  On  this  map  the  boundaries  of  the  dio- 
ceses are  marked  with  heavy  dotted  blue  lines. 
And  the  western  limits  of  the  dioceses  of  Caledonia 
and  Selkirk,  which  abut  against  Alaska,  are  drawn 
precisely  where  the  Muscovite  and  the  American 
Governments  have  always  maintained  the  frontier 
is  located.  This  semi-official  map,  therefore,  shows 
that  three  years  after  the  assembling  of  the  Anglo- 
American  Joint  High  Commission,  the  Church  of 
England,  through  its  representative,  the  Church 
Missionary  Society,  considered  that  the  field  of  its 
missionary  labors  in  Canada,  extended  only  as  far 
west  as  the  boundary  claimed  by  the  United  States. 

At  the  Paris  Exposition  of  1878,  the  Canadian 
Government  exhibited  a  map  prepared  the  previous 
year,  showing  the  boundaries  of  the  Dominion,  which 
received,  on  account  of  the  excellency  of  its  draftsman- 
ship, a  first  prize.     On  this  map  the  frontier  between 

*•  Proceedings  of  the  Church  Missionary  Society  for  Africa  and 
the  East:  One- Hundred-and-Second- Year,  1900-1901.  London 
Church  Missionary  House,  Salisbury  Square,  1901.  "North 
West  Canada  &  British  Columbia.  C.  M.  S.  Report  PI,  10." 
(Opposite  page  499.) 


Map  in  the  Church  Missionary  Society  Proceedings,  1901,  showing  the 

Dioceses  in  Canada. 


MAP  No.   24. 


146  THE   ALASKA   FRONTIER. 

Canada  and  Alaska  was  marked,  it  Is  understood,  in 
accordance  with  the  Russian  and  the  United  States 
ideas  of  the  boundary.  This  map  hung  thereafter 
for  a  number  of  years  in  the  Parliament  Building  at 
Ottawa  until  it  "disappeared"  about  1886.  While  it 
is  not  possible  at  present  to  give  a  reproduction  of 
this  map,  three  others,  more  or  less  rare,  are  at  hand, 
which  show  what  the  Canadian  authorities  thought 
was  the  boundary  the  year  immediately  before  the 
Paris  Exposition  of  1878,  and  also  six  years  after- 
wards, at  the  time  General  Cameron  was  beginning 
to  formulate  the  myth  that  Canada  has  ever  since 
reiterated  and  gradually  perfected.  The  copy  of  the 
first  of  these  maps,  which  was  published  in  1877, 
belonged  to  the  late  Pierre  Margry,^^  for  many  years 
keeper  of  the  Archives  of  the  Ministry  of  Marine  at 
Paris.  The  map  is  entitled  :  "  Map  of  the  north  west 
part  of  Canada  *  *  *  by  Thomas  Devine  *  *  * 
By  order  of  the  Hon.  Joseph  Cauchon,  commis- 
sioner of  Crown  lands,  Crown  department,  Toronto, 
*  *  *  1877."  This  official  Canadian  map  pub- 
lished in  1877,  upholds,  as  the  accompanying  repro- 
duction shows,  the  United  States  frontier  claim. 
(See  Map  No.  25.)  On  an  official  Canadian  map 
of  British  Columbia,  published  in  1884,  while  the 
frontier  line  is  not  marked  along  the  Portland 
Channel   but   from    Cape    Chacon   to    the   head   ot 

"  This  map  is  now  in  the  possession  of  the  writer. 


Map  op  the  north  west  part  of  Canada    *    »    *    by  Thomas  Devine    *    *    * 
By  order  of  the  Hon.  Joseph  Cauchon,  commissioner  of  Crown 
LANDS  Crown  department,  Toronto    *    *    *    1877." 

MAP  No.   25. 


148  THE   ALASKA   FRONTIER. 

Behm's  Canal  in  fifty-six  degrees  north  latitude, 
yet  from  that  point  the  frontier  line,  though  some- 
times marked  too  close  to  the  shore,  is  drawn  so 
as  to  include  all  the  sinuosities  of  the  mainland 
in  their  entirety  in  American  territory.  (See  Map 
No.  26.)  And  again  on  another  Canadian  Govern- 
ment map,  issued  in  1884,  "  Map  shewing  the  Rail- 
ways of  Canada,  to  accompany  Annual  Report  on 
Railway  Statistics,  1884,  Collingwood  Schreiber,  Chief 
Engineer  and  Genl.  Manager  Canadian  Government 
railways,"  the  frontier  runs  south  of  Pearse  Island, 
then  up  the  Portland  Channel,  and  then  far  inland, 
sustaining  absolutely  the  contention  of  the  United  States 
and  overthrowing  all  the  Canadian  arguments  about 
measuring  the  ten  leagues  inland  from  the  outer  line 
of  the  territorial  waters.     (See  Map  No.  27.) 

It  is  difficult  to  see  how  the  Canadian  government 
can  in  any  way  evade  the  evidence  furnished  against 
it  by  these  official  maps.  But  the  British  Imperial 
Government  is  even  more  sharply  blocked  by  its 
own  official  admissions  from  backing  up  the  Canadian 
claims.  For  upon  the  British  **  Admiralty  Chart  No. 
787,"  giving  the  North-west  coast  of  America  from 
•*  Cape  Corrientes,  Mexico,  to  Kadiak  Island,"  pre- 
pared in  1876  by  F.  J.  Evans,  R.  N.,  published  in 
1877  and  corrected  up  to  April  i8g8,  the  frontier  of 
the  United  States  is  marked  from  the  Arctic  Ocean 
down  along  the  one  hundred  and  forty-first  degree  of 
longitude  west  from  Greenwich,  and  then  advancing 


Official  Canadian  Map  of  British  CoLxmBiA,  1884. 

MAP  No.  26. 


Map  shewing  the  Railways  of  Canada,  to  accompany  annual  report  on  Railway 
Statistics,  1884,  Collingwood  Schreiber,  Chief  Engineer  and  Genl.  Manager 
Canadian  Government  Railways."    Compiled  by  Canadian  Pacific  Railway. 


MAP  No.   27. 


BRITISH    ADMIRALTY   CHART   NO.    787.  I5I 

on  the  continent  but  passing  round  the  sinuosities  of 
the  coast  so  as  to  give  a  continuous  Hsiere  of  territory 
cutting  off  the  Dominion  of  Canada  from  all  contact 
with  any  of  the  fiords  or  sinuosities  that  bulge  into  the 
continent  between  Mount  Saint  Elias  and  the  Port- 
land Channel,  the  frontier  is  drawn  to  the  head  of 
the  Portland  Channel  at  about  fifty-six  degrees. 
(See  Map  No.  22.)  But  not  satisfied  with  this  official 
confirmation  of  the  Russian  and  the  United  States 
claims,  which  was  made  only  five  months  before  the 
Quebec  Conference  met,  the  British  Admiralty  ac- 
tually renewed  upon  this  same  chart,  corrected  to  August 
igoi,  more  than  two  years  after  the  conference  ad- 
journed, their  sanction  of  the  boundary  claimed  first 
by  Russia,  and  afterwards  by  the  United  States.  (See 
Map  No.  I.)  Thus  the  British  Government  itself  has 
upheld  both  before  the  assembling  of  the  Joint  High 
Commission  and  also  since  that  body  adjourned  the 
territorial  claims  held  and  maintained  by  both  the 
Russian  and  the  United  States  Governments,  whereby 
Canada  is  not  entitled  to  an  outlet  upon  tide  water 
above  fifty  four  forty^     In  the   face  of  these   two 

"I  bought  one  copy  of  Admiralty  Chart  No.  787,  corrected  to 
April,  1898,  at  Edward  Stanford's,  26  and  27  Cockspur,  Charing 
Cross,  S.  W.,  London,  in  September,  1901,  and  two  copies  of 
the  same  chart  corrected  to  August,  1901,  at  Stanford's  m  Lon- 
don, in  September,  1902. 

A  section  of  Admiralty  Chart  No.  787  corrected  to  April, 
1898,  showing  the  Alaskan  lisi^re,  was  reproduced  in  The  Alaska- 
Canadian  Frontier  (  The  Journal  of  the  Franklin  Institute,  March, 


152  THE    ALASKA   FRONTIER. 

issues  (1898  and  1901)  of  Chart  No.  787,  how  can 
any  British  statesman  in  the  future  argue  in  favor 
of  the  Canadian  claims? 

But  there  is  still  more  official  English  evidence  that 
blocks  the  Canadian  demands. 

When  the  Duke  of  Wellington  was  about  to  start 
in  1822  to  represent  England  at  the  International 
Congress  of  Verona,  he  received  from  Secretary 
Canning  instructions  to  urge  upon  the  attention  of 
the  Russian  plenipotentiaries  at  that  Congress  the 
protest  of  the  British  Government  against  the  Ukase 
of  1 82 1.  In  those  instructions,  after  consulting  and 
obtaining  the  opinion  of  the  great  English  jurist 
Lord  Stowell  (earlier  Sir  William  Scott),  Canning 
wrote  to  the  Duke  of  Wellington : 

"  Enlightened  statesmen  and  jurists  have  long  held 
as  insignificant  all  tides  of  territory  that  are  not 
founded  on  actual  occupation,  and  that  title  is,  in 
the  opinion  of  the  most  esteemed  writers  on  public 
law  to  be  established  only  by  public  use."^^ 

In  a  Memorandum  on  the  Russian  Ukase  of  182 1, 
that  the  Duke  of  Wellington  wrote  at  Verona,  Octo- 
ber 17th,  1822,  for  Count  Nesselrode,  he  said: 

"The  best  writers  on  the  laws  of  nations  do  not 

1902).  A  reprint  of  this  article  was  sent  to  all  the  members  of 
the  present  Congress,  including  Mr.  Griffith  of  Indiana  who  there- 
upon called  attention  to  that  chart  in  the  House  on  May  13,  1902. 
See  the  Congressional  Record,  May  14th,  1902,  page  5825. 

"•  Fur  Seal  Arbitraiion^  Volume  IV.,  page  388. 


OCCUPATION   AND   USE.  1 53 

attribute  the  exclusive  sovereignty,  particularly  of 
continents,  to  those  who  have  first  discovered  them ; 
and  although  we  might  on  good  grounds  dispute  with 
Russia  the  priority  of  discovery  of  these  continents, 
we  contend  that  the  much  more  easily  proved,  more 
conclusive,  and  more  certain  title  of  occupation  and 
use,  ought  to  decide  the  claim  of  sovereignty."  ^ 

In  addition.  Sir  Robert  Phillimore,  a  leading  author- 
ity upon  questions  of  International  Law,  has  thus  de- 
scribed what  confers  upon  a  Nation  tide  through 
occupation. 

"The  next  step,"  he  says,^^  "is  to  consider  what 
facts  constitute  occupation  ;  what  are  the  signs  and 
emblems  of  its  having  taken  place :  for  it  is  a  clear 
principle  of  International  Law,  that  the  title  may 
not  be  concealed,  that  the  intent  to  occupy  must  be 
manifested  by  some  overt  or  external  act. 

H«  H«  :}:  ^  H:  4: 

"These  acts,  then,  by  the  common  consent  of  na- 
tions, must  be  use  of  and  settlement  in  the  discovered 
territories. 

^  4:  H«  4:  Hi  4: 

"Indeed,  writers  on  International  Law  agree  that 
Use  and  Settlement,  or,  in  other  words,  continuous 
usey  are  indispensable  elements  of  occupation  prop- 

•*  Fur  Seal  Arbitration,  Volume  IV.,  page  389. 

"*  Commentaries  upon  International  Law  by  Sir  Robert  Philli- 
more, D.  C.  L.,  a  member  of  Her  Majesty's  Most  Honourable 
Privy  Council,  and  Judge  of  the  High  Court  of  Admiralty, 
Third  Edition,  London,  1879.    Volume  I.,  pages  331,  333,  334. 


154  THE   ALASKA  FRONTIER. 

erly  so  called.  The  mere  erection  of  crosses,  land 
marks,  and  inscriptions  is  ineffectual  for  acquiring  or 
maintaining  an  exclusive  title  to  a  country  of  which 
no  real  use  is  made. 

"  But  when  occupation  by  Use  and  Settlement  has 
followed  upon  discovery,  it  is  a  clear  proposition  of 
Law,  that  there  exists  that  corporeal  possession  {cor- 
poralis  quaedam  possessio  [Grotius]  detentio  cor por alls 
[Bynkershoek]  which  confers  an  exclusive  title  upon 
the  occupant,  and  the  Dominium  eminens,  as  Jurists 
speak,  upon  the  country  whose  agent  he  is." 

In  the  light  of  the  above  statements  of  Interna- 
tional Law  by  two  of  the  leading  statesmen  of  Eng- 
land, Canning  and  Wellington,  at  the  time  she  nego- 
tiated the  Anglo-Muscovite  treaty  of  1825,  as  well 
as  the  above  quotation  from  an  English  international 
jurist  of  such  world  wide  repute  as  Phillimore,  by 
what  acts  have  Russia,  England  and  the  United 
States  demonstrated  their  respective  rights  of  occu- 
pancy to  the  territory  included  in  the  unbroken 
Alaskan    lisiere  ? 

On  the  one  hand  the  British  Government,  up  to  the 
Quebec  Conference,  at  least,  has  not  claimed  that 
either  through  British  officials  or  subjects  it  ever 
actually  occupied  any  part  of  the  American  territory 
to  which  it  formally  laid  claim  at  the  Quebec  Confer- 
ence in  1898.  Instead  of  this  the  British  Authorities 
recognized  both  by  English  and  Canadian  official 
maps,  by  confirming  the  lease  of  the  Russian  Ameri- 


OCCUPATION    BY   RUSSIA.  1 55 

can  Company  to  the  Hudson's  Bay  Company  of  the 
unbroken  lisiere  on  the  main  land  from  Cross  Sound 
down  to  fifty  four  degrees  forty  minutes,  by  numerous 
acts  of  British  officials  and  even  by  English  and  Ca- 
nadian state  papers,  that  the  British  Empire  had  not 
rights  of  occupancy  in  the  Alaskan  lisiere. 

On  the  other  hand,  both  the  Muscovite  and  the 
United  States  Governments  enforced  their  right  to 
the  lisiere  by  actual  acts  of  occupancy  and  sover- 
eignty in  the  territory  to  which  the  English  Empire 
now  lays  claim.  In  the  first  place,  as  soon  after  the 
promulgation  of  the  treaty  of  1825  as  the  necessary 
information  could  be  collected  and  arranged,  the 
Russian  Government  published  in  1827  Krusenstern's 
map  showing  as  Russian  territory  an  unbroken 
strip  on  the  continent  down  to  fifty-four  degrees 
forty  minutes,  and  all  the  interior  waters  enclosed  by 
it.  Two  years  later,  in  1829,  the  Imperial  Govern- 
ment in  Piadischeff 's  atlas  renewed  this  claim,  and 
subsequently  re-asserted  it  on  many  other  maps, 
such  as  the  map  of  Russian  America  in  the  atlas 
issued  in  the  years  1830  to  1835  t>y  the  Russian  War 
Office,  and  that  of  TebenkofT  published  in  1849,  ^^^ 
on  the  official  Russian  map  of  1861.  The  Russian 
American  Company  also  built  forts  and  established 
trading  posts  in  the  lisiere,  thus  actually  occupying 
the  territory  in  question  for  the  purpose  of  the  fur 
trade.  Besides,  in  1839,  the  Russian  American  Com- 
pany leased  the  strip  of  coast  to  the  Hudson's  Bay 


156  THE   ALASKA   FRONTIER. 

Company,  which  was  a  recognition  of  the  sovereignty 
of  Russia  in  the  lisiere  by  Britain  through  its  author- 
ized agent,  the  Hudson's  Bay  Company.  And  the 
English  Government  further  confirmed  the  lease. 
This  arrangement  by  lease  was  renewed  in  1849 
for  ten  years  and  again  in  1859  for  a  few  years, 
and  also  in  1862  for  three  years,  and  then  again  it 
was  extended  to  1867.  On  the  map,  too,  that  Sir 
George  Simpson  exhibited  in  1857  before  a  Parlia- 
mentary Committee  and  which  Parliament  ordered 
to  be  printed,  the  lisiere  was  marked  according  to 
what  Russia  and  since  1867  the  United  States  have 
always  claimed  as  the  extent  of  their  territory.  At 
the  end  of  the  various  renewals  of  the  original  lease 
the  Russian  American  Company  re-entered  into  pos- 
session of  the  forts  and  ports  in  the  strip,  thus 
adding  again  a  de  facto  to  its  de  jure  occupation. 
The  Russian  American  Company  also  received  the 
allegiance  of  the  Indians  who  inhabited  the  lisiere. 
Soon  after  the  purchase  of  Alaska  by  the  United 
States  in  1867,  the  Department  of  State  published  a 
map  of  the  newly  acquired  territory,  which  Charles 
Sumner  made  use  of  in  his  speech  in  favor  of  the 
purchase.  Upon  this  map  the  boundaries  of  Alaska 
were  marked  according  to  the  treaty  of  1825  so  as 
to  give  to  the  United  States  a  lisiere  thirty  miles 
inland  on  the  continent,  thereby  including  in  Amer- 
ican territory  an  unbroken  lisiere  below  Mount  Saint 
Elias  of  the  same  length  and  width  as  was  marked 


OCCUPATION    BY   THE    UNITED    STATES.  1 57 

Upon  the  Russian  maps.  When  Alaska  was  trans- 
ferred in  1867,  a  small  force  of  United  States  troops 
immediately  occupied  Sitka,  Port  Tongas  and  other 
posts.  The  United  States  have  established  and  main- 
tained, since  the  transfer,  customs  posts  in  the  lisiere 
and  collected  revenue  in  it.  The  United  States  rev- 
enue cutters  have  patrolled  the  inland  waters  sur- 
rounded by  the  lisiere.  The  United  States  have 
received  the  unquestioned  allegiance  of  the  Indians 
in  the  lisiere.  Americans  established  mission  schools 
towards  the  head  of  the  Lynn  Canal  in  the  early 
eighties.  In  the  United  States  census  of  1880,  and 
also  in  that  of  1890,  the  Indians  living  in  the  lisiere 
were  publicly  and  officially  returned  as  part  of  the 
population  of  the  United  States.  In  addition,  under 
the  protection  of  the  United  States  Government, 
American  citizens  settled  in  and  occupied  the  lisiere 
on  the  main  land;  they  built  towns  within  the  pan- 
handle ;  and  they  founded  and  developed  industrial 
enterprises  in  the  strip.®® 

Thus  it  becomes  apparent  that  while  the  United 
States  have  actually  occupied  and  made  use  of  the 
Alaskan  lisiere — as  Russia  had  begun  to  occupy  and 
use  the  strip  before  the  sale  in  1867  to  the  United 
States — both  Great  Britain  and  Canada  not  only  by 

•*A  good  deal  of  information  about  the  value  and  wealth  of 
Alaska  is  given  in  a  paper  read  by  Mr.  Donald  Fletcher  of 
Seattle  at  the  Trans-Mississippi  Commercial  Congress  at  Saint 
Paul,  Minn.,  1902.     Printed  at  Seattle,  Washmgton. 


158  THE    ALASKA   FRONTIER. 

many  official  acts  confirmed  the  belief  of  Russia  and 
the  United  States  that  the  lisiere  was  continuous  and 
included  all  the  sinuosities  above  fifty-four  forty  in 
their  entirety,  but  also  abstained  from  all  attempts — 
except  under  the  form  of  a  lease  of  the  lisiere  by 
the  Hudson's  Bay  Company  from  the  Russian  Amer- 
ican Company — to  occupy  and  make  use  of  the  strip. 
The  title  to  an  unbroken  lisiere  on  the  continental 
shore  has  thus  received  an  important  confirmation 
through  prescription. 

Sir  Robert  Phillimore  thus  speaks  of  title  by  pre- 
scription :  ^ 

"  The  practice  of  nations,  it  is  not  denied,  proceeds 
upon  the  presumption  of  Prescription,  whenever  there 
is  scope  for  the  admission  of  that  doctrine.  The  same 
reason  of  the  thing  which  introduced  this  principle 
into  the  civil  jurisprudence  of  every  country,  in 
order  to  quiet  possession,  give  security  to  property, 
stop  litigation,  and  prevent  a  state  of  continued  bad 
feeling  and  hostility  between  individuals,  is  equally 
powerful  to  introduce  it,  for  the  same  purposes, 
into  the  jurisprudence  which  regulates  the  inter- 
course of  one  society  with  another. 

*Tn  other  words,  there  is  an  International  Pre- 
scription, whether  it  be  called  Immemorial  Posses- 
sion, or  by  any  other  name.     The  peace  of  the  world, 

*'  Commentaries  upon  International  Law,  by  Sir  Robert  Philli- 
more, 1879,  London.    Third  Edition,  Volume  I.,  pages  361-363. 


PRESCRIPTION.  159 

the  highest  and  best  interests  of  humanity,  the  ful- 
filment of  the  ends  for  which  States  exist,  require 
that  this  doctrine  be  firmly  incorporated  in  the 
Code   of  International   Law." 

After  citing  with  approval  upon  this  point  Grotius 
and  Vattel,  Phillimore  continues : 

*•  But  that  Prescription  is  the  main  pillar  upon 
which  the  security  of  national  property  and  peace 
depends,  is  as  incontrovertible  a  proposition  as  that 
the  property  and  peace  of  individuals  rest  upon  the 
same  doctrine." 

Phillimore  then  gives  his  sanction  to  a  passage  of 
Henry  Wheaton  upon  this  subject  in  the  following 
manner :  ^ 

"To  these  remarks  should  be  added  the  observa- 
tion of  a  great  modern  jurist : — 

"'The  general  consent  of  mankind  has  established 
the  principle,  that  long  and  uninterrupted  possession 
by  one  nation  excludes  the  claim  of  every  other. 
Whether  this  general  consent  be  considered  as  an 
implied  contract  or  as  positive  law,  all  nations  are 
equally  bound  by  it,  since  all  are  parties  to  it,  since 
none  can  safely  disregard  it  without  impugning  its 
own  title  to  its  possessions ;  and  since  it  is  founded 
upon  mutual  utility,  and  tends  to  promote  the  gen- 
eral welfare  of  mankind.' " 

Concerning   the   perfection   and  the   loss   of  title 

^Commentaries  upon  International  Law  by  Sir  Robert  Philli- 
more, 1879,  London.     Third  Edition,  Volume  I.,  page  365. 


l60  THE    ALASKA   FRONTIER. 

to  territory    through    prescription,  Alphonse   Rivier, 
holds :»« 

"Does  a  State  lose  the  right  to  make  good  its 
sovereignty  upon  territory,  owing  to  a  prolonged 
omission  ? 

"There  is  no  doubt,  nevertheless,  that  a  State 
which  during  a  considerable  lapse  of  time  remains 
silent  concerning  its  real  or  pretended  right  and  ac- 
cepts the  injury  {lision)  without  protest  or  resistance, 
appears  to  renounce  this  right  or  these  pretensions, 
abandoning  them,  and  acquiescing  in  the  contrary  pre- 
tensions. It  must  be  said  for  prescription  as  for  oc- 
cupation :  the  Laws  of  Nations  do  not  make  history 
retrace  its  steps ;  it  sanctions,  on  the  contrary,  the 
state  of  things  that  the  evolution  of  history  has  cre- 
ated and  time  has  consecrated." 

Edmund  Burke,  too,  recognized   in  the  following 

*•  "Un  6tat  perd-il  le  droit  de  faire  valoir  sa  souverainet6  sur 
un  territoire,  par  I'effet  d'une  omission  prolongee? 

******* 

"  II  n'est  pas  douteux,  n^anmoins,  que  I'Etat  qui  pendant  un 
laps  de  temps  considerable  garde  le  silence  sur  son  droit  vrai  ou 
pr6tendu  et  accepte  la  lesion  sans  protestation  ni  resistance,  paralt 
renoncer  a  ce  droit  ou  ^  ces  pretentions,  les  abandonner,  et  ac- 
quiescer  aux  pretentions  contraires.  On  doit  le  dire  pour  la  pre- 
scription comme  pour  1'  usucapion  :  le  droit  des  gens  ne  fait  pas 
rebrousser  chemin  ^  \  histoire,  il  sanctionne  au  contraire  1'  etat  de 
choses  que  revolution  historique  a  cree  et  que  le  temps  a  consa- 
cre."  Principes  du  Droit  des  Gens,  par  Alphonse  Rivier,  Consul 
General  de  la  Confederation  Suisse  ^  Bruxelles :  Paris,  1896,  Vol- 
ume I.,  page  220. 


PRESCRIPTION.  l6l 

passage  that  prescription  is  a  part  of  the  Law  of 
Nations  :^°" 

"If  it  were  permitted  to  argue  with  power,  might 
one  not  ask  one  of  these  gentlemen,  whether  it  would 
not  be  more  natural,  instead  of  wantonly  mooting 
these  questions  concerning  their  property,  as  if  it  were 
an  exercise  in  law,  to  found  it  on  the  solid  rock  oi pre- 
scription?— the  soundest,  the  most  general,  the  most 
recognized  title  between  man  and  man  that  is  known  in 
municipal  or  in  public  jurisprudence ;  a  title  in  which 
not  arbitrary  institutions  but  the  eternal  order  of  things 
gives  judgment;  a  title  which  is  not  the  creature,  but 
the  master  of  positive  law ;  a  title  which^  though  not 
fixed  in  its  term,  is  rooted  in  its  principles  in  the  Law 
of  Nature  itself,  and  is  indeed  the  original  ground  of 
all  known  property ;  for  all  property  in  soil  will  always 
be  traced  back  to  that  source,  and  will  rest  there. 
*  *  *  These  gentlemen,  for  they  have  lawyers 
amongst  them,  know  as  well  as  I  that  in  England  we 
have  had  always  a  prescription  or  limitation,  as  all 
nations  have  against  each  other.  *  *  *  AH  titles 
terminate  in  Prescription." 

When  it  is  remembered  that  for  a  period  of  more 
than  seventy  years — all  through  the  Russian  posses- 
sion of  Russian  America  from  1825  to  1867  and  the 
United  States  occupation  of  Alaska  from  the  latter 
date  until  the  Quebec  Conference  convened  in  1898 — 

'"°  Edmund  Burke,  Volume  IX. ,  page  449.  Letter  to  R.  Burke, 
Esq. 


1 62  THE    ALASKA    FRONTIER. 

the  British  Empire  made  no  formal  protest  against 
the  right  of  sovereignty  to  a  continuous,  unbroken 
lisiere  on  the  mainland  from  fifty-four  degrees  forty 
minutes  in  the  south  up  to  Mount  Saint  Elias  in 
the  north  which  first  the  Muscovite  Empire  and 
afterwards  the  American  Republic  openly  asserted ; 
and  that  on  the  contrary  the  British  Empire  not 
only  passively  assented  to  that  right  of  sovereignty 
exercised  in  the  continuous  lisiere  first  by  Russia 
and  afterwards  by  the  United  States,  but  also  again 
and  again  actually  confirmed  it ;  it  becomes  clear 
that  the  United  States,  had  they  no  other  legal 
grounds  upon  which  to  base  their  right  to  the  un- 
broken lisiere  on  the  continental  shore,  would  have 
obtained  by  prescription  a  good  title  to  that  strip. 

In  a  conference  held  at  Washington  on  May  30th, 
1898,  between  ex-Secretary  of  State  John  W.  Foster 
and  Reciprocity  Commissioner  John  A.  Kasson,  rep- 
resenting the  United  States,  and  Sir  Julien  Paunce- 
fote,  the  British  Ambassador,  and  Sir  Louis  Davies, 
a  member  of  the  Canadian  Ministry,  acting  for  the 
British  Empire,  the  United  States  and  Great  Britain 
agreed  to  appoint  a  Joint  High  Commission  to  con- 
sider and  arrange  upon  a  basis  more  favorable  for 
both  sides  commercial  reciprocity,  the  Bering  Sea 
seal  question  and  other  important  subjects. 

The  Commission  met  and  organized  for  business 
at  Quebec,  August  23d,  1898.  The  American  Com- 
missioners were  Senator  Fairbanks,  of  Indiana,  Chair- 


THE    QUEBEC    CONFERENCE.  1 63 

man,  Senator  Gray  of  Delaware,  Representative  Ding- 
ley  of  Maine,  ex-Secretary  of  State  Foster  of  Indiana, 
Reciprocity  Commissioner  Kasson  of  Iowa,  and  T. 
Jefferson  Coolidge  of  Massachusetts,  ex-Minister  to 
France.  The  British  Commissioners  were  Baron 
Herschel,  Lord  High  Chancellor  of  England,  Chair- 
man, Sir  Wilfred  Laurier,  Premier  of  Canada,  Sir 
Richard  Cartright,  Canadian  Minister  of  Trade  and 
Commerce,  Sir  Louis  Davies,  Canadian  Minister  of 
Marine  and  Fisheries,  and  Sir  James  T.  Winter, 
Premier  of  Newfoundland. 

Soon  after  the  Commission  met  at  Quebec,  the 
British  Government  claimed  that  the  eastern  bound- 
ary of  Alaska  should  run  from  the  extremity  of 
Prince  of  Wales  Island  at  fifty-four  degrees  forty 
minutes,  along  the  estuary  marked  on  recent  maps 
as  Pearse  Canal  to  the  head  of  the  Portland  Chan- 
nel, from  there  straight  to  the  coast,  and  then  along 
the  mountains  nearest  to  the  shore  and  across  all 
the  sinuosities  of  the  sea  that  advance  into  the  con- 
tinent up  to  Mount  Saint  Elias.     (See  Map  No.  2.) 

The  subject  of  the  boundary  between  Alaska  and 
Canada  was  discussed  at  length.  Mr.  Foster  we 
know,  from  his  article  on  the  subject  and  the  ability 
he  has  displayed  in  many  important  posts  at  home 
and  abroad,  presented  the  American  point  of  view 
with  force  and  learning.  And  Lord  Herschel  we 
can  be  sure,  judging  from  his  long  and  distin- 
guished record  as   a  jurist  and  a  judge,  made  the 


1 64  THE    ALASKA    FRONTIER. 

most  of  the  Canadian  contention.  But  the  Commis- 
sioners, after  many  sessions  extending  over  several 
months,  were  unable  to  agree  as  to  the  meaning  of 
the  language  of  the  treaty  of  1825.  The  British  Com- 
missioners then  proposed  "  a  conventional  boundary, 
by  which  Canada  should  receive,  by  cession  or  per- 
petual grant,  Pyramid  Harbor,"  on  the  Lynn  Canal, 
and  a  "strip  of  land  connecting  it  with  Canadian 
territory  to  the  northwest"  and  the  rest  of  the 
boundary  to  be  drawn  about  as  the  United  States 
claimed  it  should  be.  This  plan  the  American  Com- 
missioners refused.  The  British  representatives  then 
asked  for  the  submission  of  the  whole  territory  in 
dispute  to  the  arbitration  of  three  jurists  of  repute, 
one  chosen  by  the  United  States  and  one  by  Great 
Britain,  and  the  third  by  these  two.  These  judges, 
the  Anglo-Canadian  Commissioners  desired  should 
be  governed  in  making  their  decision  by  the  follow- 
ing rules  :^°^ 

"  {a)  Adverse  holding  or  prescription  during  a 
period  of  fifty  years  shall  make  a  good  title.  The 
arbitrators  may  deem  exclusive  political  control  of  a 
district,  as  well  as  actual  settlement  thereof,  sufficient 
to  constitute  adverse  holding  or  to  make  title  by  pre- 
scription. 

^'^^  Sessional  Papers,  Volume  14,  Session  1899,  Volume 
XXXIII.  (99).  Boundary  between  Alaska  and  Canada.  Pro- 
tocol No.  LXIII.  of  the  Joint  High  Commission,  Washington, 
respecting  the  boundary  between  Alaska  and  Canada.  Febru- 
ary 1 8th,  1899. 


THE   QUEBEC    CONFERENCE.  I 65 

"((5)  The  arbitrators  may  recognize  and  give  effect 
to  rights  and  claims  resting  on  any  other  ground 
whatever  vaHd  according  to  international  law,  and 
on  any  principles  of  international  law  which  the  ar- 
bitrators may  deem  to  be  applicable  to  the  case, 
and  which  are  not  in  contravention  of  the  forego- 
ing rule. 

"  {c)  In  determining  the  boundary  line,  if  territory 
of  one  party  shall  be  found  by  the  tribunal  to  have 
been  at  the  date  of  this  treaty  in  the  occupation  of 
the  subjects  or  citizens  of  the  other  party,  such  effect 
shall  be  given  to  such  occupation  as  reason,  justice, 
the  principles  of  international  law,  and  the  equities 
of  the  case,  shall,  in  the  opinion  of  the  tribunal, 
require." 

The  United  States  Commissioners,  while  ready  to 
accept  arbitration  with  rules  '*a"  and  "b"  desired 
rule  "c"  to  read — in  order  to  make  it  conform  with 
the  local  conditions  in  Alaska — thus : 

**  In  considering  the  *  coast '  referred  to  in  said 
treaties,  mentioned  in  Article  III.  [the  treaties  of 
1825  and  1867],  it  is  understood  that  the  coast  of 
the  continent  is  intended.  In  determining  the  bound- 
ary line,  if  territory  of  one  party  shall  be  found  by 
the  tribunal  to  have  been  at  the  date  of  this  treaty 
in  the  occupation  of  the  subjects  or  citizens  of  the 
other  party,  such  effect  shall  be  given  to  such  occu- 
pation as  reason,  justice,  the  principles  of  inter- 
national law  and  the   equities  of  the  case   shall,    in 


1 66  THE   ALASKA   FRONTIER. 

the  opinion  of  the  tribunal,  require;  and  all  towns 
and  settlements  on  tide  water,  settled  under  the  au- 
thority of  the  United  States  and  under  the  jurisdic- 
tion of  the  United  States  at  the  date  of  this  treaty, 
shall  remain  within  the  territory  and  jurisdiction  of 
the  United  States." 

To  this  change  in  rule  "  c,"  the  Anglo-Canadian 
representatives  replied  they  could  not  agree.  They 
objected  to  the  declaration  added  to  the  first  part  of 
rule  "  c,"  which  ran  as  follows  :  "  In  considering  the 
*  coast '  referred  to  in  said  treaties,  mentioned  in 
Article  III.  [the  treaties  of  1825  and  1867],  it  is 
understood  that  the  coast  of  the  continent  is  under- 
stood." 

Commenting  on  the  above  quotation,  the  British 
Commissioners  said  :  "while  it  was  probably  intended 
only  by  this  clause  that  the  line  should  be  drawn 
upon  the  continent,  the  language  used  is  open  to 
misconception."  In  addition  they  objected  to  the 
words  "  that  all  towns  or  settlements  on  tide  water, 
settled  under  the  authority  of  the  United  States  and 
under  the  jurisdiction  of  the  United  States  at  the 
date  of  this  treaty,  shall  remain  within  the  territory 
and  jurisdiction  of  the  United  States,"  as  a  marked 
and  important  departure  from  the  rules  that  governed 
the  Venezuela  boundary  question.^*^ 

^^  Concerning  the  Venezuela  Boundary  question,  see  the  article 
by  ex-President  Cleveland  in  The  Century,  Volume  LXII.,  New 
Series  Volume  XL,,  May  to  October,  1901. 


THE   QUEBEC    CONFERENCE.  I 67 

The  American  Commissioners  then  inquired  whether 
the  Anglo-Canadian  representatives  would  consider 
the  selection  of  an  umpire  from  the  American  con- 
tinent. The  British  Commissioners  answered  that 
they  considered  such  a  choice  as  "  most  objection- 
able." 

"The  American  commissioners  declined  the  Brit- 
ish plan  of  arbitration,  and  stated  that  there  was 
no  analogy  between  the  present  controversy  and 
the  Venezuelan  dispute  ;  that  in  the  latter  case  the 
occupation  of  the  territory  in  question  had  from  the 
beginning  been  followed  by  the  constant  and  re- 
peated protests  and  objections  of  Venezuela,  and  the 
controversy  was  one  of  long  standing ;  but  that  in 
the  case  of  the  Alaskan  territory  there  had  been 
a  peaceful  and  undisputed  occupation  and  exercise  of 
sovereignty  for  more  than  seventy  years,  and  that  no 
question  respecting  this  occupation  and  sovereignty 
had  been  raised  by  the  British  Government  until  " 
the  Joint  High  Commission  was  appointed.  "  They 
challenged  their  British  colleagues  to  cite  a  single 
instance  in  history  where  a  subject  attended  with 
such  circumstances "  was  submitted  to  arbitration. 
But  the  United  States  representatives  offered  to  sub- 
mit the  dispute  to  the  decision  of  three  judges  of  the 
highest  standing  from  each  country.  With  the  pro- 
vision, however,  that  as  territorial  questions  touched 
so  vitally  the  sovereignty  of  nations,  a  binding 
decision    could   only   be    given    by   four   of  the   six 


l68  THE    ALASKA    FRONTIER. 

judges.  The  British  Commissioners,  however,  rejected 
this  plan  of  the  American  Commissioners.  ^^  The 
position  of  America  on  the  one  hand,  and  of 
Canada  and  Britain  on  the  other,  concerning  the 
Alaskan  boundary  question,  are  well  summed  up 
in  the  words  of  Nesselrode  in  1824:  "  Ainsi  nous 
voulons  conserver,  et  les  Compagnies  Angloises 
veulent  acquerir."  (Thus  we  wish  to  retain, 
and  the  English  companies  wish  to  acquire). 
The  Joint  High  Commission  adjourned  in  March, 
1899,  and  the  boundary  question  was  referred  to  the 

^°'  The  Canadians  in  their  anxiety  to  have  their  claims  to  Ameri- 
can territory  submitted  to  an  "  impartial "  arbitration  seem  to 
forget  entirely  that  in  1899  Britain  refused  the  offer  of  the  South 
African  Republic  to  refer  the  differences  pending  between  those 
two  powers  to  an  "  impartial ' '  arbitration,  and  that  afterwards 
Canada  sent  troops  to  aid  in  bringing  the  Transvaal  and  the 
Orange  Free  State  under  the  dominion  of  the  British  Crown.  The 
Transvaal  offered  to  submit  the  differences  with  England  to  a 
Court  composed  of  two  arbitrators,  nominated  by  the  two  govern- 
ments respectively,  who  * '  shall  agree  respecting  a  third  person, 
who  shall  act  as  President  of  the  arbitration  tribunal,"  which 
should  decide  in  every  case  by  a  majority  vote. 

Sir  Alfred  Milner,  in  submitting  this  proposal  to  his  Govern- 
ment, wrote : — 

"  It  is  evident  that  this  third  person  will  virtually  decide  every- 
thing, and  it  is  provided  that  he  shall  '  not  be  a  subject  of  one  of 
the  arbitrating  parties, '  t.  e. ,  a  foreigner. 

"On  this  ground  alone  I  feel  sure  her  Majesty's  Government 
will  not  accept  the  proposal.  For  every  reason  I  think  it  is  de- 
sirable that  it  should  promptly  intimate  its  total  inability  to  enter- 
tain it." 

See  extract  from  Sir  Alfred  Milner' s  dispatch  of  June  14th, 
1899,  to  his  Home  Government :  The  Times,  London,  August 
26th,  1899,  page  5. 


MODUS    VIVENDI,    OCTOBER    20,     1 899.  1 69 

two    Governments   for    further   negotiations.      Since 
then   the  Joint   High   Commission   has  not  met. 

By  a  modus  vivendi  agreed  upon  on  October  20, 
1899,  between  the  American  Secretary  of  State 
and  the  British  Charge  d' Affaires  at  Washington, 
the  actual  occupation  of  territory  about  the  head  of 
the  Lynn  Canal  was  decidedly  altered.^*^  No  ques- 
tion of  territorial  jurisdiction  about  the  summit  of 
the  Lynn  Canal  arose  until  the  Klondike  gold  ex- 
citement of  1897.  Towards  the  latter  part  of  that 
year  a  post  of  the  Canadian  Northwest  Mounted 
Police  was  at  Lake  Tagish  at  a  point  called  Tagish 
Post  many  miles  to  the  north  of  the  White  and  the 
Chilkoot  Passes.  By  the  Circular  of  Instructions 
issued  by  the  Commissioners  of  Customs  of  Can- 
ada, December  17th,  1897,  ^  merchandise  coming 
from  the  United  States  into  the  Northwest  Terri- 
tory of  Canada  must  be  reported  at  Tagish  Post.-^°^ 
Soon  afterwards  the  Canadian  customs  post  was  ad- 
vanced southward  to  Bennett  and  then  on  to  the  sum- 
mit of  the  Chilkoot  Pass,  and  afterwards  withdrawn  to 
Lake  Lindeman,  which  is  south  of  Bennett.  In  the 
spring  of   1898  a  United  States   Customs   Post  was 

^^  Modus  Vivendi  between  the  United  States  of  America  and  the 
United  Kingdom  of  Great  Britain  and  Ireland,  fixing  a  pro- 
visional boundary  lin£  between  the  Territory  of  Alaska  and  the 
Dominion  of  Canada  about  the  Head  of  Lynn  Canal. 

*•*  Sessional  Papers,  Volume  XXXIII.  (No.  79),  62  Victoria, 
1899. 


170  THE    ALASKA    FRONTIER. 

established  at  the  head  of  Lake  Bennett.     This  point 
was  selected  because  the  United  States  maps  of  that 
region  showed  the  boundary  to  be  about  at  that  point 
and  at  the  same  time  it  commanded  both  the  White 
Pass  and  the  Chilkoot  Trails,  so  that  one  post  served 
both.     As    the   Canadian  officials    claimed    that   the 
American  post  at  Bennett  was  on  Canadian  territory 
and   they   rendered   it   troublesome   for   the    United 
States  officer  there  to  transact  his  business,  the  Ben- 
nett post    was   discontinued,  and   two   officers  were 
ordered  to  establish  posts  at  Lake  Lindeman  on  the 
Chilkoot  Trail  and  at  the  Log  Cabin  on  the  White 
Pass  Trail.     Owing  to  the  lack  of  accommodations 
at  Lake  Lindeman  the  officer  on  the  Chilkoot  Trail 
established  himself  at  the   summit   of  the    Chilkoot 
Pass  and  remained  there   until   travel   by   that  trail 
ceased.     The  post  at  the  Log  Cabin  was  maintained 
until  it  was  withdrawn  according  to  the  modus  vivendi 
of  October  1899  to  the  summit  of  the  White  Pass. 
Before  the  modus  vivendi  came   into   force,    there 
was  a  Canadian  post,  called  Pleasant  Camp,  in  the 
direction   of  the    Dalton  Trail  in   the   valley   of  the 
Chilcat  River,   about   ten   marine  leagues,   or   thirty 
miles  inland  from  the  coast  line.     According  to  the 
temporary  boundary  line  along  the  Klaheela  River, 
the    point    of    that    temporary    line    nearest    to    the 
neighboring  branch  or  sinuosity  of  the  Lynn  Canal 
is  much  less  than  ten  marine  leagues  or  thirty  miles 
inland.     (See  Map   No.  28.)     By  the  terms  of  the 


MtMp  to  €u:co7np<uvy  the  Modu*  Vivendi, concluded.  October  20.  Jff93 
between  the  United  States  and  Great  Sritain^/xjcing  a.  provisional 
botuutary  line  between  Cajvada,  oTid  the  Territory  of  ALcLshtx  ubout 
the  hetui  of  LynrvCartaJ^ 

Prtpareti in.  thr  Office  of  th»  (f.S.Coa»e  and.  Gt^djttxe Survey.  Treasury  Department . 


Statut*    Mil** 


Map  showing  the  Modus  Vivendi,  October  2oth,  1899. 
MAP  No.   28. 


172  THE    ALASKA   FRONTIER. 

modus  vivendi  the  boundary  of  American  territory 
was  brought  nearer  to  the  coast  line  at  three  points. 
In  agreeing  to  the  summits  of  the  White  and  the 
Chilkoot  Passes  as  the  provisional  boundary,  the  spirit 
of  the  treaty  of  1825  was  observed.  For  at  both 
those  points  there  is  a  natural  water  shed  less  than 
ten  marine  leagues  from  the  coast.  But  in  the  region 
of  the  Dalton  Trail,  the  frontier,  to  accord  with  the 
spirit  of  the  Anglo-Muscovite  Treaty  of  1825,  should 
be  marked  much  farther  inland  than  the  temporary 
line  agreed  upon  by  the  modus  vivendi.  In  this 
modus  vivendi,  the  United  States  acted  most  gener- 
ously towards  the  British  Empire,  which  at  that  time 
was  in  an  awkward  position.  Only  nine  days  before, 
October  nth,  war  had  begun  in  South  Africa  be- 
tween the  English  and  the  Boers.  If,  owing  to  a 
possible  clash  between  American  and  Canadian 
miners  in  their  hunt  for  gold  in  the  region  of  the 
Chilcat  River,  Britain  was  anxious  for  a  temporary 
boundary  in  that  valley  in  order  to  minimize  the 
chances  of  trouble,  it  was  not  the  United  States  that 
was  called  upon  make  concessions  but  rather  Eng- 
land and  Canada.  And  yet  it  was  America  that 
made  all  the  concessions  in  this  temporary  arrange- 
ment. She  withdrew  her  posts  at  all  three  points 
and  Canada  advanced  hers  correspondingly. 

That  the  boundary  should  be  surveyed  and  marked 
out  without  unnecessary  delay  so  as  to  prevent  a 
possible    conflict  between    American    and   Canadian 


THE   QUESTION    OF    ARBITRATION.  1 73 

miners  there  can  be  no  question.  There  is,  how- 
ever, a  radical  difference,  on  the  one  hand,  between 
adjusting  the  inland  boundary  along  the  natural 
water-shed  or  at  a  distance  of  ten  leagues  parallel  to 
the  sinuosities  of  the  coast  by  a  joint  survey  and  a 
mutual  policy  of  "give  and  take"  so  as  to  round 
off — owing  to  the  multitudinous  curves  and  turns 
that  the  line  following  the  sinuosities  would  take — 
the  sharp  corners,  and  on  the  other  hand,  referring 
to  an  International  Tribunal  the  recent  preposterous 
and  unjust  claim  of  Canada  to  one  or  more  outlets 
on  tide  water  above  fifty-four  forty.  When  a  joint 
survey  of  the  exact  boundary  is  actually  carried  out, 
it  may  prove  to  be  difficult  to  determine  whether  at 
certain  points  there  is  a  natural  watershed  formed 
by  mountains  passing  inland  round  the  sinuosities. 
This  point,  which  is  the  only  one  about  which  there 
can  be  an  honest  difference  of  opinion,  might  well 
be  referred  to  the  International  Court  of  Arbitration 
at  the  Hague. 

Since  1623 — whenEmericCruce^"^  urged  in  his  Nou- 
veau  Cynee  the  creation  at  Venice  of  an  International 
Court  of  the  Nations — and  1625 — when  Hugo  Grotius 
advocated  in  his  De  Jure  Belli  ac  Pads  a  mitigation 
of  the  horrors  of  war — until  now,  the  development  of 
International  Arbitration  as  a  means  of  securing  Inter- 
national Peace  has  been  slow  and  difficult.     And  it  is 

^^^  ilm^ric  Cruc^,  by  Thomas  Willing  Balch,  Philadelphia, 
Allen,  Lane  and  Scott,  1900,  pages  24-37. 


174  'THE    ALASKA    FRONTIER. 

not  by  trumping  up  fanciful  territorial  claims  which 
are  not  based  upon  facts,  and  then  straining  every 
means  to  bring  them  for  adjudication  before  an 
International  Court  that  International  Peace  will  be 
promoted  through  International  Arbitration.  And 
such  is  the  position  of  Britain  and  Canada  in  their 
efforts  to  secure  one  or  more  outlets  on  tide  water 
above  "fifty-four  forty."  Just  as  Russia  and  the 
United  States  together  have  possessed  and  occupied 
an  unbroken  lisiere  on  the  continent  from  Mount 
Saint  Elias  to  "fifty-four  forty"  for  much  more  than 
fifty  years,  so  the  British  Empire  has  had  possession 
of  British  Columbia  for  more  than  fifty  years :  and 
what  would  Canada  think  if  the  United  States  asked 
the  Dominion  to  submit  her  title  to  British  Colum- 
bia to  "an  impartial"  arbitration? 

While  the  decision  of  the  Paris  Tribunal  upon  the 
Bering  Sea  seal  fisheries  very  properly  knocked  out 
the  contentions  of  sovereignty  put  forward  by  the 
United  States  Government  upon  an  alleged  closed  sea, 
the  Court  compromised  upon  the  vital  point  at  issue, 
for  it  failed  to  afford  adequate  protection  for  the  fur 
seals.^"^  Evidently,  encouraged  by  this  miscarriage  of 
justice,  the  Canadians  hope,  that — although  they  have 
no  substantial  facts  with  which  to  support  their 
claims — if   they   claim    only    enough    and    then    can 

'"  Fur-Bearing  Animals  of  Alaska :  House  of  Representatives' 
Report  No.  2303,  57th  Congress,  ist  session. 

The  Beidler  Bill:  H.  R.  13,387,  57th  Congress,  ist  session. 


THE   QUESTION    OF   ARBITRATION.  1 75 

have  their  contentions  passed  upon  by  an  Interna- 
tional Court,  they  will  at  least  somehow  get  a  port 
somewhere  on  the  Lynn  Canal.  If  Canada  obtains 
a  deep  water  harbor  there  as  she  desires,  she  can 
build  and  fortify  a  great  naval  arsenal,  from  which 
she  would  menace  American  commerce  with  Alaska, 
Siberia  and  Japan  as  it  steams  to  and  fro  across 
the  Northern  Pacific.^"* 

*°®  The  following  letter  from  the  pen  of  Mr.  Frederick  W.  Seward 
appeared  in  the  New  York  Tribune ^  Nov.  14th,  1902: 

A  MENACE  FROM  CANADA. 

MR.  SEWARD  BELIEVES  THAT  THE  ALASKAN  BOUNDARY  DISPUTE 
ENDANGERS   INTERNATIONAL  GOOD  FEELING. 

To  the  Editor  of  the  Tribune  : 

Sir:  Very  few  people  either  in  England  or  the  United  States 
seem  to  comprehend  the  "true  inwardness"  of  the  so-called 
' '  Alaska  Boundary  Dispute. ' '  That  is  unfortunate,  for  it  contains 
the  germ  of  a  grave  national  danger.  The  average  newspaper 
reader  supposes  it  to  be  a  dispute  over  a  few  acres  or  square  miles 
of  wild  land,  perhaps  frozen,  on  either  side  of  an  imaginary  line. 
But  it  is  not  a  boundary  dispute  of  that  sort.  The  boundary  was 
established  years  ago  by  treaties  in  which  both  nations  took  part. 
What  the  Canadian  schemers  are  pushing  for  now  is  "an  outlet 
to  tidewater"  by  means  of  a  harbor  on  the  Lynn  Canal. 

What  is  the  Lynn  Canal  ?  It  is  a  great  estuary,  broad  and 
deep,  like  the  lower  Hudson  or  the  Delaware.  It  traverses 
Southern  Alaska  and  is  the  chief  artery  of  commerce.  It  is  the 
thoroughfare  by  which  all  traders,  miners  and  travellers  reach  the 
valley  of  the  Yukon,  unless  they  make  a  two  thousand  mile  voyage 
around  by  the  ocean. 

What  is  the  harbor  that  the  Canadian  schemers  covet  ?  It  is 
one  of  the  most  important  strategic  points  on  our  Pacific  Coast. 
It  is  a  deep,  wide,  semi-circular  basin,  safe  in  all  weathers,  open 
to  navigation  all  the  year  round,  with  easy  access  to  the  sea,  large 


176  THE    ALASKA   FRONTIER. 

Canada  wishes,  and  she  has  the  support  of  England,^^ 
to  have  her  claim — that  she  is  entitled  to  many  outlets 
upon  tide  water  above  fifty-four  degrees  forty  minutes 
— submitted  to  the  arbitration  of  third  parties.  The 
United  States  should  never  agree  to  any  such  arrange- 
ment. If  such  a  plan  were  adopted  and  a  decision 
were  given  altogether  against  Canada,  she  would  be 

enough  to  float  not  only  trading  craft,  but  the  cruisers  and  battle- 
ships of  the  British  navy.  It  is  surrounded  by  mountain  heights 
which,  when  fortified,  would  render  it  impregnable.  In  a  word, 
what  they  want  is  to  establish  a  naval  and  commercial  port  for 
Great  Britain,  resembling  Gibraltar  or  Aden — and  to  establish  it 
in  the  heart  of  an  American  Territory,  at  the  head  of  its  inland 
navigation  !  The  power  owning  such  a  stronghold  might  well 
claim  to  dominate  the  North  Pacific.  It  would  cut  Alaska  Terri- 
tory in  two  parts,  with  British  forts  and  custom  houses  between, 
controlling  their  intercourse  with  each  other  and  with  the  outside 
world.  Compared  with  such  a  stronghold  Esquimault  or  Halifax 
is  of  minor  consequence.  That  port  is  the  objective  point  that 
Canadian  schemers  are  working  for.  That  is  what  they  hope  to 
extort  from  us  by  threats  or  cajolery.  They  know  what  they  are 
about ;  apparently  we  do  not ;  at  least,  they  hope  so.  So  they 
muddle  the  question  with  specious  pretenses  of  harmless  purpose, 
by  which  to  "outwit  the  Yankees." 

When  this  monstrous  demand,  without  a  shadow  of  foundation, 
was  first  put  forward  it  brought  to  a  sudden  check  the  work  of 
the  Joint  High  Commission  to  settle  questions  between  Canada 
and  the  United  States.  If  persisted  in  it  will  do  more  than  that. 
It  will  tend  to  break  up  the  present  era  of  good  feeling  between 
the  two  branches  of  the  English  speaking  race — an  era  so  full  of 
promise  for  both  nations  and  for  the  whole  civilized  world. 

The  whole  '  *  claim  "  is  so  preposterous  and  absurd  that  it  would 

^'^  Baron  Herschel,  Lord  High  Chancellor  of  England,  presented 
the  argument  for  the  Canadian  territorial  claims  to  the  Anglo- 
American  Joint  High  Commission. 


THE    QUESTION    OF    ARBITRATION.  1 77 

no  worse  off  than  she  has  been  from  1825  to  the  pres- 
ent day,  while  anything  decided  in  her  favor  would 
be  a  clear  gain  to  her.  This  country,  on  the  contrary, 
cannot  by  any  possibility  obtain  more  than  she  now 
has,  viz.,  that  which  she  purchased  from  Russia  in  1867 
and  to  all  of  whose  rights  she  succeeded  ;  at  the  same 
time  the  United  States  can  lose  heavily.  For  the  in- 
clusion in  Canadian  territory  of  only  one  port,^^°  like 

hardly  be  credible  if  we  did  not  know  how  silly  and  blind  to  their 
own  interests  great  governments  may  sometimes  be.  The  Cana- 
dian "  statesmen "  who  are  pressing  it  are  blind  leaders  of  the 
blind.  They  are  like  children  playing  with  fire.  They  do  not 
realize  the  far-reaching  consequences  of  the  conflagration  they  are 
trying  to  kindle.  For  it  is  not  to  be  believed  that  the  American 
people,  when  roused  to  an  understanding  of  the  question,  are 
ever  going  to  acquiesce  in  the  construction  of  a  Gibraltar  in  their 
own  waters  by  any  foreign  power.  American  patience  is  great  and 
American  good  nature  is  proverbial,  but  even  these  have  limits. 

FREDERICK  W.  SEWARD. 

MoNTROSE-ON-THE-HuDSON,  November,  1902. 

""  Mr.  Alexander  Begg  in  his  article,  Review  of  the  Alaskan 
Boundary  Question  (December,  1900,  page  24),  published  at 
Victoria,  British  Columbia,  refers  to  the  strategic  importance 
for  the  British  Empire  of  having  some  port  north  of  fifty-four 
forty.     He  says : 

' '  The  strategic  importance  of  that  portion  of  British  Colum- 
bia now  under  review  should  be  evident  to  every  intelligent  stu- 
dent of  the  map.  The  day  will  assuredly  come,  in  the  not  very 
distant  future,  when  new  lines  of  railway  and  telegraph  will  cross 
the  Canadian  half  of  the  continent,  and  these  lines  which  under 
the  new  Imperial  Policy  will  make  Canada  the  western  highway 
of  the  Empire,  must  play  a  large  part  in  its  consolidation.  Can 
we  afford,  therefore,  to  allow  valuable  strategic  and  commercial 
points  on  the  Pacific  Coast  to  pass  into  the  hands  of  a  foreign 
nation,  when  by  treaty  rights  they  are  unquestionably  British  ?  ' ' 


178  THE    ALASKA    FRONTIER. 

Pyramid  Harbor  or  Dyea  on  the  Lynn  Canal,  would 
greatly  lessen  for  the  United  States  the  present  and 
future  value  of  the  Alaskan  lisiere.  The  evidence  in 
the  case  is  overwhelmingly  on  the  side  of  the  United 
States  and  shows  that  they  are  entitled,  by  long,  un- 
interrupted occupancy  and  other  rights,  to  an  unbroken 
strip  of  land  on  the  continent  from  Mount  Saint  Elias 
down  to  the  Portland  Channel.  There  is  no  more 
reason  for  the  United  States  to  allow  their  right  to  the 
possession  of  this  unbroken  Alaskan  lisiere  to  be 
referred  to  the  decision  of  foreign  judges,  than  would 
be  the  case  if  the  British  Empire  advanced  a  claim  to 
sovereignty  over  the  coast  of  the  Carolinas  or  the  port 
of  New  York  and  proposed  that  this  demand  should  be 
referred  to  the  judgment  of  subjects  of  third  Powers. 
If  the  demand  of  Canada  to  Alaskan  territory  is  re- 
ferred to  foreigners  for  settlement,  the  United  States 
can  gain  nothing,  while  they  will  incur  the  risk  of 
losing  territory  over  which  the  right  of  sovereignty  of 
Russia  and  then  of  the  United  States  runs  back  un- 
challenged for  much  more  than  half  of  a  century. 
If  France  advanced  a  claim  to  the  Isle  of  Wight  and 
then  asked  England  to  refer  her  title  to  the  island 
to  the  arbitration  of  foreigners,  would  Great  Britain 
consent?  And  for  the  English  Empire  to  make  a 
demand  to  many  outlets  upon  tide  water  on  the 
northwest  coast  of  America  above  fifty-four  degrees 
forty  minutes  and  then  ask  the  United  States  to 
submit  this  claim   to   the  arbitration  of  the   citizens 


THE    POLICY    FOR    THE    UNITED    STATES.  1 79 

of  third  Powers,  is  a  similar  case.  Whether  the 
frontier  should  pass  over  a  certain  mountain  top  or 
through  a  given  gorge  is  a  proper  subject  for  set- 
tlement by  a  joint  survey ;  and  by  a  mutual  policy 
of  give  and  take  in  an  exchange  of  the  interlap- 
ping  bits  of  territory,  the  sharp  corners  produced  by 
a  line  run  parallel  to  the  indentations  of  the  shore 
could  be  done  away  with.^^^  But  by  no  possibility  has 
Canada  any  right  to  territory  touching  tide  water 
above  fifty-four  degrees  forty  minutes. 

"^  On  this  point  see  the  Bayard,  Phelps,  Salisbury  correspond- 
ence in  1885  and  1886.  Senate,  Ex.  Doc.  No.  14J.  ^.gth  Con- 
gress, ist  Session,  page  14. 


POSTSCRIPT. 


Just  as  the  book  itself  is  printed,  the  Public 
Ledger,  Philadelphia,  Tuesday,  February  17th,  1903, 
page   I ,  publishes  the  following  article : 

"ALASKA   BOUNDARY   PROOF. 

"President  and  Secretary  of  War  Find  it 
IN  A  British  Map. 

"Washington,  Feb.  16. — An  interesting  discov- 
ery was  made  yesterday  by  President  Roosevelt  and 
Secretary  Root  in  regard  to  the  Alaska  boundary. 
As  they  were  speaking  of  the  labors  of  the  Alaska 
Boundary  Commission,  of  which  Mr.  Root  is  a  mem- 
ber, they  consulted  the  large  geographical  globe  that 
stands  near  the  Cabinet  table. 

"  The  globe  is  so  big  that  the  map  of  Alaska 
appears  on  a  large  scale,  and  they  easily  traced  the 
boundary  line  between  that  Territory  and  the  British 
possessions.  To  their  surprise  they  found  that  the 
boundary  as  shown  there  sustains  the  contention  of 
the  United  States  in  all  particulars,  although  it  was 
prepared  under  the  direction  of  the  British  Admi- 
ralty." 

(181) 


1 82  POSTSCRIPT. 

The  fact  that  the  British  Admiralty  sustains  the 
United  States  claim  in  Alaska,  was  discovered  in 
London  by  my  brother,  Mr.  Edwin  Swift  Balch, 
who  found  British  Admiralty  Chart  No.  787,  cor- 
rected up  to  August,  1898.  I  bought  the  copy 
from  which  Map  No.  22  is  reproduced  September 
1st,  1901,  at  Edward  Stanford's  in  London.  This 
chart  was  referred  to  and  its  importance  explained 
in  an  article  by  the  writer  La  Frontiere  Alasko- 
Canadienne,  which  was  printed  at  the  beginning 
of  the  first  number  of  the  Revue  de  Droit  Inter- 
national at  Brussels  for  the  year  1902  (Second 
Series,  Vol.  IV.,  page  17).  This  chart  was  also 
cited  as  evidence  by  the  writer  in  a  letter  of  Janu- 
ary 27th,  1902,  which  was  published  in  the  Nation  of 
New  York,  February  6th,  1902,  and  in  the  Evening 
Post,  February  7th,  1902.  The  part  of  this  chart 
showing  the  Alaska-Canada  frontier  was  repro- 
duced in  the  article  The  Alas ko- Canadian  Frontier 
in  The  Journal  of  the  Franklin  Institute  for  March 
1902  (Vol.  153,  No.  3,  page  183),  and  from  that 
article  the  map  was  reproduced  in  The  Philadelphia 
Times  (since  merged  in  the  Public  Ledger')  of  April 
6th,  1902.  During  the  past  ten  months,  this  chart 
has  been  referred  to  over  and  over  again  by  the 
newspapers  of  the  United  States. 

The  same  chart,  corrected  to  August,  1901,  (see 
Map  No.  i)  is  cited  in  this  monograph  for  the  first 
time  as  evidence,  and  is   referred  to  in  reviews   of 


POSTSCRIPT.  183 

this   book  in   the   Public  Ledger   and   The  Press,   of 
Philadelphia,  to-day,  February  22. 


On  January  24th,  1903,  a  convention  was  signed 
at  Washington  by  Secretary  of  State,  John  Hay, 
and  the  English  Ambassador  Sir  Michael  Herbert. 
It  was  ratified  by  the  Senate,  and  became  a  treaty 
on  February  nth,  1903.  The  treaty  provides  that 
the  question  of  the  Alaska-Canada  boundary  shall 
be  referred  to  a  Commission  or  Tribunal  of  six 
jurists,  three  to  be  appointed  by  the  United  States, 
and  three  by  Great  Britain.  King  Edward  the 
Seventh,  in  his  speech  opening  Parliament  on  Feb- 
ruary 17th,  said  that  the  treaty  referred  the  frontier 
question  to  "an  arbitral  tribunal."  But  as  an  even 
number  of  Americans,  and  Britons  or  Canadians 
are  to  sit  on  the  Commission,  it  can  hardly  be  said 
that  the  subject  is  referred  to  an  arbitration. 

The  American  Commissioners,  in  making  up  their 
opinion  must  consider  the  acts  of  Canada  and  of 
England,  the  official  Canadian  Government  maps 
and  the  British  Admiralty  charts.  Moreover,  the 
new  treaty  provides  that  the  French  or  official  ver- 
sion of  Articles  III.,  IV.  and  V.  of  the  Anglo- 
Russian  Treaty    of   February  16-28,   1825,  shall    be 


1 84  POSTSCRIPT. 

used  in  deciding  what  arrangement  the  Muscovite 
and  the  British  Empires  agreed  upon  in  that  in- 
strument ;  and  in  the  last  part  of  Article  IV.,  the 
phrase  "  parallele  aux  sinuosites  de  la  cote  "  is  re- 
published correctly.  This  phrase  especially,  makes 
it  incumbent  upon  the  three  American  Commis- 
sioners not  to  yield  to  Canada  an  outlet  to  salt 
water  anywhere  above  the  Portland  Channel. 

T.  W.  B. 

Philadelphia,  Washington's  Birthday,  1903. 


INDEX. 


INDEX. 


PAGE. 

Adams,  Charles  Francis 60 

Agreement  of  neutrality  during  Crimean  War  .    .    .     49,  50,  51 
' '  Ainsi  nous  voulons  conserver,  et  les  Compagnies  Angloises 

veulent  acquerir." Title  page,  xiii,  15,   168 

Alabama,  The 60 

Alabama  Arbitration,  The 64 

Alaska  .  x,  xi,  9,  21,  52,  55,  57,  58,  73,  74,  76,  89,  93,  94,  181 

Alaska- Canadian  Frontier,  The xi,  151,  182 

Alexander  the  First,  The  Emperor 3 

Alexander  the  Second,  The  Emperor,  35,  60,  61,  63,  64,  65,  173 

America i 

Andrews,  C.  L xi 

Anglo-Russian  negotiations  ....    .    .    9,  10,  12,  13,  14,  15,  16 

Anian,  Strait  of 2 

Appleton,  Mr 57 

Arbitration,  International  .    .    168,  173,  174,  176,  177,  178,   179 

Arbitration  of  the  m/awaf  boundary 172,   173 

Arrowsmith,  John 35,  38,  74,    115 

Article  Fourth  of  the  Treaty  of  1824 140,    141 

Article  III.  of  the  Treaty  of  1825 6,  8 

Article  IV.  of  the  Treaty  of  1825 8 

Article  VI.  of  the  Treaty  of  1825 39 

Article  VII.  of  the  Treaty  of  1825 41 

Article  XI.  of  the  Treaty  of  1825 40 

Bagot,  Sir  Charles    .  10,  12,  13,  15,  16,  17,  100,  107,  126,   142 

Bagot's  three  propositions 10,  12,  13 

Balch,  Mr.  Edwin  Swift xii,  182 

Balch,  Mr.  T.W 113,  114 

Balls  given  to  Russian  officers 66,  67 

Banks,  General xii 

Barker,  Mr.  Wharton 64 

(187) 


1 88  INDEX. 

PAGE 

Barnes,  Mr.  T.  W 64 

Bayard,  Thomas  F 93,  94,  95 

Begg,  Mr.  Alexander 109,  no,  in,  112,  113,   114 

Behm's  Canal 104 

Benjamin,  Judah  P 59 

Bennett,  Lake 169,   170 

Bentinck,  Family  of 106,  107 

Bering 2 

Bering  Sea 3.  5,  18 

Bering  Strait 2,  76 

Bigelow,  Mr.  John 64 

Blaine,  James  G 103 

Bluntschli 121,  122,  123,   138 

Boers,  The 172 

Bouchette,  Joseph,  Jr 27,  29,  74 

Boundary  Commission  appointed 183 

British  Admiralty  upholds  American  claim 151,181 

British  Admiralty  Chart  No.  787  .  Frontispiece,  x,  22, 104, 105, 182 

British  Admiralty  Chart  No.  2431 115 

British  Admiralty  Chart  No.  2458 116,   117 

British  Columbia 82,  88,  93,  94 

British  Empire 8,  9,  35,  95,  139,   178 

British  Government,  see  English  Government. 

British  Government  upholds  American  claim  .  22,  148,  151,   152 

Bru6,  A.   H 23,  80,  81,  82,  83 

Brymner,  Mr 109,  no,   in 

Buell,  Colonel  Augustus  C xii,  56,  60 

Burke,  Edmund 160,   161 

Burrough's  Bay 104 

Bynkershock *    * 154 

Cameron,  General 146 

Canada 82,  90,  124,  157,  163,  175,  176,  178,  179 

Canadian  arguments 99,  125,  131 

Canadian  demands  .     x,  55,  85,  88,  99,  100,  108,  109,  115,  123 

125,  146,  163,  173,  174 

Canadian  Government    .    .    ix,  82,  88,  90,  91,  92,  94,  143,  144 

146,  148 


INDEX.  1 89 


PAGE 


Canadian  maps,    .  23,  27,  29,  36,  54,  86,  87,  109,  no,  in,   115 

144,  145,  146,  147,  148,  149,   150 

Canadian  writers     .    .  " 22,   125 

Canning,  George i5)  17.  21,  126,  142,   152 

Canning's  hundred  miles  lisiere 143 

Canning,  Sir  Stratford 5,  16,  17,  18,  21,  107,   108 

Cape  Town 61 

Cartright,  Sir  James  T 163 

Cassiar  district.  The 88,  89 

Chilkoot  Pass,  The 169,  170,  172 

Church  Missionary  Society,  The 144,  145 

Civil  War,  The 58,  63 

Clay,  Mr 68 

Clarence  Sound,  Duke  of 13,  no,  in,   112 

Cleveland,  President 92,   102 

Cole,  Senator 67 

Colonist,  The 113 

Confederate  States,  The 59,  60,  61,  62,  63,  65 

Cook,  Captain 2 

Coolidge,  Mr.  T.  Jefferson 163 

Cdte,  the 131,   132 

Cramp,  Mr.  Charles  H xii,  60 

Cramp,   Messrs 66 

Crimean  War 51,  53,  54.  55.  61 

Dall,  Professor  William  H 96,  97,  108,  134,   135 

Dalton  Trail 170,   172 

Davies,  Sir  Louis 162,   163 

Davis,  Jefferson 60 

Davis,  Mr.  L.  Clarke xii 

Dawson,  Dr.  George  M 96,  97,  98 

Dennis,  Mr.  J.  S 85,  86,  88 

Deshneff,  The  Cossack 2 

Devine,  Mr.  Thomas 146,  147 

Dingley,  Representative 163 

Diodorus  Siculus 118 

Dionissievsky,  Fort  Saint      39.  42 

Dyea 178 


I90  INDEX. 

PAGE 

Edward  the  Seventh,  King     ,        183 

Em^ric  Cruc6 173 

England x,  i,  3,  4,  16,  18,  21,  23,   176 

English  Cabinet 13 

English  Government  .     5,  27,  35,  39,  40,  51,  52,  54,  60,  74,  88 

92,  94,  101,  143,  148,  154,  163,  169 

English  Maps  .  Frontispiece,  x,  19,  30,  32,  34,  35,  38,  76,  77,  79 

80,  82,  104,  105,  115,  116,  144,  145,  148,   151 

Evarts,  William  M 92 

Explorers,  Early i,  2,  3 

Farragut,  Admiral 63 

Fifty-four  forty 6,  22,  44,  55,  71,  loi,  173 

"  Fifty-four  forty  or  fight " 56 

Fisheries  Conference 96 

Foster,  The  Hon.  John  W 140,  141,  163 

France i 

Frontier e  Alaska- Canadienne,  La xi,  182 

Glenora 89 

Gortschakofl[",  Prince 57)  58,  59,  64,  69 

Grant,  President 84,  85 

Granville,  Earl  of 85 

Gray,  Senator 163 

Great  Britain 4,  12,  15 

Grotius,  Hugo 117,  136,  154,  173 

Gwin,  Senator 57,  58 

Hague  Court  of  Arbitration,  The 173 

Hall,  W.  H 118 

Halleck,  General 120 

Hay,  Secretary  John 183 

Herbert,  Sir  Michael 183 

Herschel,  Baron 163,  176 

Hill,  Mr.  S.  S 30 

Hodgins,  Mr.  Thomas 98,  99,  100,  loi,  102,    103 

HoUoway,  Colonel  William  R xi 

House  of  Commons 35j  47>  54 


INDEX.  191 

PAGE 

Hudson's  Bay  Company   .    i,  12,  15,  35,  36,  40,  42,  43,  44,  45 

46,  47.  49,  50,  68 
Hunter,  Mr.  Joseph 90,  91 

Inland  boundary 1 73 

International  Law.    .    .   118,  119,  120,  121,  122,  123,  124,  135 
136,  137,  138,  139,  152,  153.  158,  159,  160,  161 

Jackson,  General  Andrew 56 

Johnston,  Mr.  Arthur 107 

Joint  High  Commission,  Anglo-American  ....   144,  162,  163 

164,  165 
Journal  of  the  Frayiklin  Institute xi,  151,  182 

Kasson,  Mr.  John  A 162,  163 

Kennedy,  Mr.  Walker xii 

Kennin,  Mr.  Frank  NichoUs xii 

Krusenstern,  Admiral  de 23,  24,  25,  27,  74,  77,  155 

Lamar,  Lucius  Q.  C 59,  60,  61,  62 

Lardy,  Monsieur 123 

Laurier,  Sir  Wilfrid 108,  109,  iii,  113,  114,   163 

Lessosvky,  Admiral 63 

Lewis  and  Clark i 

Libraries      ....      xii 

Lieven,  Count 13,  100,  138 

Lindeman,  Lake 169,  170 

Lincoln,  President 66 

Lisi^re,  The  .  x,  10,  18,  21,  30,  39,  41,  53.  54.  82,  95,  100,  loi 

125,  155,156,  157.  158,  162,  178,  179 

Littre 129,  130,  131,  133 

Log  Cabin 170 

Lynn  Canal 10,49,  133,  I34.  '69,  175,  178 

Marshall,  Chief  Justice 102 

Martens,  von 136 

Martin,  Peter 88,  89,  90,  102 

McDonald,  Mr.  A.  L xii 


192  INDEX. 


PAGE 


Meissas  and  Michelot 127,  128 

Menace  from  Canada 175,  176 

Mendenhall,  Mr.  Thomas  C xii 

Mer  and  Oc^an 126,  127,  128,  129,  130 

Middleton,  Mr 4 

Milner,  Sir  Alfred 168 

Modus  Vivendi,  The  '    • 169,  170,  171,  172 

Mofras,  Duflot  de 30.  31 

Muscovite  Government,  see  Russian  Government. 

Napoleon  the  Third,  The  Emperor 60,  61,  63 

Nesselrode,  Count  .    .     4,  9,  12,  13,  15,  16,  17,  21,  41,  99,  100 

107,  108,  152,  168 

Nesselrode,  Letter  to  Lieven I3>i4 

Nicholas  the  First,  The  Emperor 50 

North  America i,  52 

Novo-Archangelsk 16,  40 

Nys,  Monsieur  le  Juge xii,  117 

Oc6an,  see  mer. 

Occupation  and  use 152,  153,  154 

Occupation  of  lisiere  by  Russia I55>  156 

Occupation  of  lisiere  by  United  States 156,  157,  158 

Pacific  Ocean i,  2,  3,  4,  5 

Palmerston,  Lord 40,  41 

"  ParaMe  aux  sinuosit6s  de  la  cote  "      .    .    .      97,98,101,102 

131,  134,  184 

Paris  Tribunal 1 74 

Paul,  The  Emperor 4 

Pauncefote,  Sir  Julian 162 

Pearse  Channel  or  Canal 115,  163 

Pearse  Island 112 

Peirce,  Mr.  George xii,  64 

Petermann's  Mittheilungen 77 

Phelps,  Mr 93.  94.  95 

Phillimore 137.  i53.  i54,  158,  i59 

Phillips,  Mr.  P.  Lee xii 


INDEX.  193 


PAGE 


Piadischeff,  Functionary 24,  26,  27,  30,  74,  155 

Poletica,  Monsieur  de 4,  5,  9,  12,  16,  17,  107 

Politkovsky,  General 49 

Polk,  President 55.  56 

Popoff,  Admiral 67 

Portland  Channel  or  Canal  .  .  6,  9,  10,  13,  14,  15,  18,  21,  23 
24,  71,  73,  77,  82,  85,  86,  87,  loi,  102,  103,  104,  105 
106, 107,  108, 110, 112,  115, 124,  148, 151, 163,  178,  184 

Prescription 158,  1 59,  160,  161,  162 

Prior,  Colonel  E.  G 108,  109,  11 1,  112 

Pyramid  Harbor 11,  164,  178 

Quebec  Conference,  The    .    .    .    •  9.  55,  i43,  I44,  151,  162-169 

Reade,  Charles 125 

Revue  de  Droit  International ix,   182 

Riddle,  Mr.  John  Wallace xii 

Rivier,  Alphonse 119,  128,  160 

Roosevelt,  President      181 

Root,  Secretary 181 

Russell,  Lord  John 47 

Russia  ...    3,  4,  9,  10,  14,  16,  17,  iS,  21,  22,  49,  55,  57,  58 

63,  69,  70,  71,  73,  93,  139 
Russian  America  .  9,  14,  35,  39,  56,  57,  67,  68,  69,  70,  71,  73 
Russian  American  Company    .    .    12,  35,  40,  41,  42,  43,  44,  45 

46,  47,  48,  49,  50,  67 

Russian  fleets      63,  64,  65,  66,  67,  72,  73 

Russian  Government    .    .    .  5,  9,  27,  35,  39,  4°,  4i,  5i,  54,  59 

62,  64,  69,  72,  144,  155 
Russian  official  maps     ...     18,  20,  23,  24,  25,  26,  27,  28,  30 

33.  37,  70 
Russian  War  office 27,  28 

Saint  Elias,  Mount  ...    ix,  9,  14,  18,  21,  22,  24,  48,  163,  178 

Saint  Petersburg xi,  4,  5,  20,  23,  24,  60,  68 

Salisbury,  The  Marquis  of 94 

Severin,  Count 27 


194  INDEX. 

PAGE 

Seward,  Mr.  Frederick  W 70,  72,  73,  175,  176,  177 

Seward,  William  H 64,  68,  69,  70,  73,  74 

Shepard,  Mr.  Edward  M 56 

Siberia i,  2,  24 

Singapore 61 

Sinuosities 98,  loi,  102,  131,  132,  133,  134,  173 

Simpson,  Sir  George     .    .  30,  32,  35,  41,  46,  47,  48,  49,  52,  53 

54.  55.  156 

Sitka 16 

Skoot  River 86,  87 

Spain I 

Stikine  River 39,  45,  86,  90,  91 

Stoeckl,  Monsieur  de 59,  67,  68,  69,  70 

Strategic  value  of  a  port  to  Canada i75.  i77 

Sumner,  Charles 70,  71,  72,  74 

Tacitus 118 

Tagish,  Lake 169 

Taylor,  Bayard 59 

TebenkofF,  Captain 30,  33,  155 

Thalweg,  The 115,   117,  118,  119,  120,  121,  122 

Thornton,  Sir  Edward 82,  85,  88,  91 

Tittmann,  Mr,  O.  H xii 

Tower,  The  Hon.  Charlemagne xii 

Transvaal,  The 168 

Treaty  of  1824 4,  140,  141 

Treaty  of  1825    ...      x,  5,  6,  8,  9,  10,  18,  21,  22,  39,  40,  41 
90,  91,  92,  96,  97,  98,  loi,  131,  139,  156,  183 

Treaty  of  1867 70,  73 

Tsar,  The 2,  61,  68 

Tupper,  Sir  Charles 97 

Ukase  of  1799 4,  14 

Ukase  of  1821 4,  14,  18,  138,  152 

United  States,  The     .    .      i,  3,  4,  9,  22,  35,  52,  68,  69,  88,  141 

157.  178 
United  States  Government   .    .     9,  63,  66,  67,  70,  76,  144,  155 


INDEX.  195 


PAGE 


United  States   map,    certified  and  published  by  Canadian 

Government 86,  87 

United  States  maps 7,  11,  74,  75,  156,  171 

Use  and  settlement 153 

Vancouver,  Captain  George      ....     2,  18,  19,  106,  107,  108 

Van  Siclen,  Mr.  George  W xii 

Variag,  The 66 

Vattel 159 

Victoria 108 

Wales  Island,  Prince  of     ....    10,  12,  13,  14,  100,  104,  163 

Wales  Island 115,  117 

Washington,  Conference  at 162 

Watts,  Mr.  Harvey  Maitland xii 

Weed,  Thurlow 63 

Wellington,  Duke  of 138,  139,  152 

Wheaton,  Henry 159 

White  Pass,  The 169,  170 

Winter,  Sir  James  T 163 

Wrangell  Island 39 

Wrangell,  Baron 40,  41,  43,  46 

Xenophon 118 


"  B  "  A  ^r  ,"  .-^ 
OF  TH'- 

iliiiilVFRSi  TY    \ 


MAPS. 


PAGE. 


No.  I.  British  Admiralty  Chart  No.  787,  published  June 
2ist,  1877,  under  the  superintendence  of  Cap- 
tain F.  J.  Evans,  R.  N.,  Hydrographer,  and 
corrected  to  August  ist,  1901  ....      Frontispiece 

No.     2.  United  States  and  English  boundary  claims    ...  7 

No.     3.  Sir  C.  Bagot's  Three  Proposed  Bouifliaries    .    .  11 

No.     4.  Vancouver's  Chart,  1799 19 

No.     5.   Russian  Pilot  Chart,  1802 20 

\j  No.     6.  Admiral  de  Krusenstern's  Map,  1827 25 

No.     7.   Functionary  Piadischeff's  Map,  1829 26 

No.     8.  Map  published  by  the  Russian  War  Office,  1830- 

1835 28 

-No.     9.  Bouchette's  Canadian  Map,  1831 29 

No.   10.  Duflot  de  Mofras's  Map,  1844 31 

^  No.   II.  Sir  George  Simpson's  Map,  1847 32 

No.    12.  Captain  Tebenkoff's  Imperial  Russian  Naval  Map, 

1849 33 

No.   13.  Hill's  Map,  1854 34 

'No.   14.  Map  shown  in  1857  by  Sir  George  Simpson  ...  36 

No.   15.  Imperial  Russian  Map,  1861 37 

"^  No.   16.  Arrowsmith's  Map,  1864 38 

No.   17.  Map  Published  by  the  State  Department  of  the 

United  States,  1867 75 

No.   18.  Berghaus's  Chart  of  the  World,  1871 78 

No.   19.  Brum's  Map  of  1833 81 

No.  20.  Brum's  Map  of  1839 83 

No.  21.  Map  Published  in  Canadian  Sessional  Papers,  1878,  87 
No.   22.  British  Admiralty  Chart,  No.  787,  published  June 
2ist,  1877,  under  the  superintendence  of  Cap- 
tain F.  J.  Evans,  R.  N,,   Hydrographer,    and 

corrected  to  April,  1898 105 

No.  23.  British  Admiralty  Chart,  No.  2458,  published  De- 
cember 15th,  1896,  and  corrected  to  March,  1900  116 

(197) 


V 


IJBT  ^^Y 


'return  to  D^t^"^^  '^SH    ~1^H 


_^fi_6j969  Ox 


^?rli^-38m.5  '68 


"-^-^ES^-.  ^ 


^Hf      library  use 

f   RETURN  TO  DESK  FROM  WHICH  BORROWED 

^  LOAN  DEPT. 

THIS  BOOK  IS  DUE  BEFORE  CLOSING  TIME 
ON  LAST  DATE  STAMPED  BELOW 


^•^vusf 


JUL  28 

RCC 


^rm^ 


Geaeral  Library 

University  of  California 

Berkeley 


